BEEF PRODUCTION 



TTKftttKBT W. MEHFOED 





G!ass_S EM-Z 
Book_ .VA5&l_ 



Gopyiight N°. 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. 




111! 

^5 , MO 

■+■3 c ^ 
03+3 

■s-iif 

-^ ^h '72 & 
03 W) J o 

• H M t- ° 

°3 5 fi 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



HERBERT W. MUMFORD 

PROFESSOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, AND CHIEF 

IN ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. 

FORMERLY PROFESSOR OF AGRICULTURE, MICHIGAN 

AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE. 



'Beef is the imperial flesh food of the race." — Kerrick 



URBANA, ILLINOIS 
PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR 

190T 



LIBRARY of CONGRESS 
Two Cootes Received 
MAY 23 I90r 
Copyright Entry 

LASS a^ XXc, No. 

COPY B. 



3 



Copyright, 1907 

BY 

HERBERT W. MUMFORD 



R. DONNELLEY & SONS COMPANY 
CHICAGO 



CONTENTS 

PART I.— FATTENING CATTLE FOR THE MARKET 

CHAPTER •• PAGE 

/ I. The Relation of Cattle Feeding to Soil Fer- 
tility 9 

II. General Considerations in Buying Feeding 

Cattle 14 

III. The Various Grades of Feeding Cattle Des- 

cribed ....... 21 

IV. Incidental Expenses in. the Cattle Feeding 

Business ; Freight and Commission ; Labor 30 

V. Some Business Phases of Cattle Feeding — 
Relation of Cost of Feeds to Profits; Re- 
lation of Initial Weights of Feeding 
Cattle to Profits on Finished Beef; Rela- 
tion of Cost Price of Various Grades of 
Feeding Cattle to Profits . . .37 

VI. Wintering Stockers and Feeders . . 46 

VII. Getting Cattle on Feed . . . .49 

VIII. Feeds used for Fattening Cattle — Their 
Preparation and Use; Corn; Cottonseed 
Meal; Ground Linseed Cake or Oil Meal; 
Oats ; Molasses ; Roughages ; Chaffing Hay 
and Mingling with Grain . . .53 

IX. Baby Beef 76 

X. Selecting Cattle for, and the Possibilities of 

the Short Feed 82 ' 

XL Making Christmas Beef . . . .86 

XII. Care of Cattle on Feed — Quietness; Number 
of Times to Feed; Number of Cattle To- 
gether; Salting; Dehorning Stockers and 
Feeders, How and Why . . .92 



4 CONTENTS 

XIII. Length of the Feeding Period . . 100 

XIV. Feeding Cattle for the Home Market . . 102 

XV. Kind and Care of Pastures for Beef Produc- 
tion; Fattening Cattle on Grass . . 104 

XVI. Hogs in the Feed Lot ... Ill 

XVII. Fitting Steers for Exhibition . . .115 

XVIII. Advantageous Seasons for Marketing Vari- 
ous Grades of Cattle; Demand for Prime 
Cattle; Demand for Baby Beef; Demand 
for Export Cattle other than at Christmas ; 
Demand for Common Cattle . . .121 

XIX. Marketable Condition — When is a Steer 
Ready for Market; Preparing Cattle for 
Shipment . . . . . .124 

XX. Lice; Mange; Ringworm; Lump-jaw; 

Blackleg; Texas Fever . 130 

XXL Equipment for Cattle Feeding — Buildings 
and Shelter ; Feed Bunks ; The Paved Lot, 
How to Make and Use It; The Self-feeder, 
How to Make and Use It . . . .143 



PART II.— BREEDING BEEF CATTLE FOR THE 
MARKET 

XXII. Breeding for Beef; Selection and Use of 
Bulls ; Management of the Bull ; Care and 
Management of the Herd; When to Have 
Calves Dropped; Age to Breed Heifers; 
Summer Feeding; Winter Feeding of Beef 
Breeding Cows 158 

XXIII. Cost of Rearing Calves Allowed to Nurse 

their Dams 172 

XXIV. The Dual Purpose Cow and Beef Production 176 

XXV. Skim Milk Calves; How to Raise a Skim 

Milk Calf. . . . . . .181 



CONTENTS 5 

PART III.— ELEMENTARY PRINCIPLES OF STOCK 
FEEDING 

General Discussion; Composition of Food-Stuffs; 
Digestion and Growth. ..... 186 

Compounding of Rations; Feeding Standards for 
Beef Cattle; Computing a "Balanced Ration" 193 



PREFACE 

The magnitude and importance of the production 
of beef as a factor in American agriculture are not gen- 
erally appreciated. The presentation of a book devoted 
solely to a discussion of the problems of the beef pro- 
ducer is an attempt to give adequate recognition to the 
industry. 

In "Beef Production" the attempt is made to pre- 
sent in the most direct manner certain facts of great 
economic importance to American beef producers. 
Much of the information given is based upon extensive 
feeding experiments conducted by the author at the 
Illinois Experiment Station. The arrangement of mat- 
ter is designed to suit the demands both of the actual 
cattle feeder and of the student; to serve both as a 
ready reference guide — a text adapted to the progres- 
sive pedagogic presentation of the subject in the class- 
room and a treatise conveniently arranged in logical 
order for the general reader interested in the subject. 
The writer fully appreciates that the work is not as 
complete and comprehensive as it might be made; it is 
presented, however, with the thought that it will con- 
tribute to the literature, especially on the economic side, 
of beef production. It is hoped that it will serve to 
make beef production more profitable. The writer 
wishes to gratefully acknowledge the valuable sugges- 
tions and assistance given in the preparation of this 
book by his associate, Mr. L. D. Hall. 

HERBERT W. MUMFORD. 

Urbana, III., January, 1907. 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



PART I. 
FATTENING CATTLE FOR THE MARKET 



CHAPTER I. 

THE RELATION OF CATTLE FEEDING TO SOIL 
FERTILITY 

More extensive operations in cattle feeding can con- 
sistently be urged upon farmers in general from the 
standpoint of maintaining or improving the fertility of 
the soil. It may be argued that other classes of live- 
stock, horses, sheep, and hogs, may be fed with greater 
profit. This may be granted where conditions are 
especially favorable to these interests, but it must be 
admitted that it is difficult, if not indeed impracticable, 
to keep sufficient hogs to furnish the desired amount 
of fertilizer. Then, again, cattle consume certain by- 
products of the farm that are difficult to convert into 
pork or bacon, mutton, or horse flesh. The feeding of 
cattle with hogs as an adjunct seems a logical solution 
to the conversion of farm products into cash meat prod- 
ucts, furnishing at the same time a valuable machine 
for the manufacture of farm yard manure. Cattle 
feeding does not necessarily mean the exclusion of other 
classes of live stock on the farm. 

The animal husbandry department of the Illinois 
Experiment Station has repeatedly stated in its bulle- 
tins that it believes that the manure produced by fat- 
tening steers will balance the expense of labor in caring 



10 BEEF PRODUCTION 

for the cattle. This, we believe, is true, yet such a state- 
ment is not sufficiently definite to meet the requirements 
of this discussion. The writer appreciates how ex- 
tremely difficult it is to determine the agricultural 
value of farm yard manure, but there is, fortunately, 
sufficient data at hand to throw some light on this intri- 
cate problem. 

Director Charles E. Thorne of the Ohio Station has 
published the most valuable data concerning the use 
and value of farm manures of which the writer has 
knowledge. In this connection the reader's attention 
is called to Circular 54 of the Ohio Station at Wooster, 
from which many of the facts used in this paper are 
quoted. From unpublished records at the Ohio Station, 
Director Thorne writes me that the average daily pro- 
duction of manure for a thousand pound steer (records 
secured from weighing the manure from 106 steers for 
an average period of five months) amounted to forty 
pounds in one instance and forty-six pounds in the other. 
Seven pounds of these amounts was straw used for bed- 
ding. In other words, the normal production of manure 
from a thousand pound steer varied from three to four 
tons for a feeding period of six months. The same au- 
thority states that "a ton of average mixed farm manure, 
as taken from open barn yards, may be expected to con- 
tain nine pounds of nitrogen, ten pounds of potassium, 
and three or four of phosphorus." Professor Thorne 
states that "when properly cared for and properly bal- 
anced, the nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in such 
manure are as effective, pound for pound, as those in 
the best fertilizing chemicals.' 7 And again: "As the 
cereal crops approach maturity there is a partial sep- 
aration of their chemical constituents, the nitrogen 
and phosphorus accumulating in the grain until about 
three fourths of that held by the entire plant is found 
there, while the straw or stover contains the major por- 
tion of the potassium. Hence, when the grain is sold 
it carries away from the farm an undue proportion of 



VALUE OF MANURE 11 

phosphorus and nitrogen, and there will in time result 
a deficiency of these elements in the soil as compared 
with potassium unless the supply of this also is reduced 
by the selling of hay and straw, or of leafy plants, such 
as tobacco. If mixed farming be practiced, including 
the growing and fattening of live stock, most of the 
potassium will be retained on the farm; but there will 
still be a heavy loss of phosphorus in that carried away 
in the bones of animals grown on the farm." It might 
be added in this latter instance that the older and more 
mature the animals fed the less will be this loss of phos- 
phorus. This indicates that many soils under average 
conditions require more phosphorus in proportion to 
nitrogen and potassium than that contained m manure. 
In other words, to make farm yard manure well bal- 
anced, phosphorus in some form should be added to it. 
This is done by the use of acid phosphate, steamed bone 
meal, or finely ground phosphate rock. 



MANURE TESTS IN OHIO 

At the Ohio Station under Professor Thome's direc- 
tion tests of farm yard manure have been running for 
nine years, in which it was used in different rotations, 
both alone and in combination with some carrier of 
phosphorus and other elements. Eight tons of manure 
per acre was the standard application. The average 
yearly increase per acre of this one application in a 
three-year rotation of corn, wheat, and clover was for 
the untreated manure 14.70 bushels of corn and 744 
pounds of stovei , a money value of $7, figuring the corn 
at 40 cents per bushel and the stover at $3 per ton. 
For the wheat following the corn the increase for the 
untreated manure was 8.36 bushels of wheat and 897 
pounds of straw, representing a money value of $7.58, 
figuring wheat at 80 cents per bushel and straw at $2 
per ton. For the clover following the wheat the increase 
in yield for the manured plot was at the rate of 686 



12 BEEF PRODUCTION 

pounds, representing a money value of $2.74, figuring 
the hay at $8 per ton. 

Summarizing, then, we may say that the applica- 
tion of eight tons of farm yard manure increased the 
crops of corn, wheat, and clover in rotation represent- 
ing a money value of $17.32, or $2.17 per ton. This 
value was determined for yard manure that had lain in 
the open through the winter. The value of stall manure 
that had been kept under cover during the time it was 
accumulating until a short time before application was 
$23.61 for the eight-ton application, or $2.95 per ton. 

WHAT AN ILLINOIS AUTHORITY SAYS 

Dr. C. G. Hopkins of the Illinois Station is authority 
for the statement that the value of farm yard manure 
comes not only from the elements of plant food which 
it may contain, but also and sometimes chiefly that 
the decaying organic matter of the manure liberates 
quantities of plant food already in the soil and adds 
humus, which may or may not, according to the 
character and previous treatment of the soil, add con- 
siderably to its value. By balancing the stall manure 
by the addition of a carrier of phosphorus the value of 
the eight tons of such manure was increased $12.20, or 
$1.53 per ton, and this after deducting the cost of the 
material used for balancing the same. Adding this to 
the untreated stall manure we have $2.95 plus $1.53, 
which equals $4.48 as the possible net agricultural value 
of the phosphated farm manure as applied to the soil 
at the Wooster Experiment Station, where the soil is 
a sandy clay loam. It should be clearly understood 
that more than one-third of this value is due to the 
addition of phosphorus, and it may be stated that prac- 
tically the same increase was made whether the phos- 
phorus was applied as acid phosphate, costing 30 cents, 
or as finely ground natural rock phosphate, costing 16 
cents, to the ton of manure. The power of farm manure 
to liberate mineral plant food from the soil applies with 



VALUE OF MANURE 13 

equal or greater force to the liberation of phosphorus 
from the insoluble rock phosphate when applied in con- 
nection with manure. 

When we remember that the production of manure 
of the 1000 pound steer for a six-months' feeding period 
varies from three to four tons, we can appreciate what a 
factor farm yard manure may become in increasing the 
revenues of the farm and that profits and losses in cat- 
tle feeding should not stop with a consideration of the 
cost of cattle and feed and their selling price. 



CHAPTER II. 

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS IN BUYING FEED- 
ING CATTLE 

There is always that first consideration as to whether 
or not the farmer should buy cattle to feed. This 
is a very important question, and the correct answer to 
it depends upon so many factors that it will seldom be 
answered twice alike. One thing is certain, it is always 
wise to be conservative in considering cattle feeding 
propositions. In general it would seem good practice 
not to buy cattle to feed unless the larger part of the 
corn and roughage necessary for finishing are available 
from products grown on the farm. Profits in cattle 
feeding, while not always denied to the man who is 
obliged to purchase corn, other concentrates, and rough- 
ages, are necessarily smaller than to the feeder who 
produces his feeds, provided, of course, the same methods 
and intelligence obtain in each instance. This is the 
chief advantage of the corn-belt cattle feeder over his 
less fortunate brother farmer outside the corn-belt. As 
to the amount of corn and roughage required to finish 
a steer, much depends upon the supplementary feeds 
and the kind and quality of roughage used with corn. 
The age and condition of the feeding cattle and the 
method of feeding also have a direct bearing upon the 
amount required. 

Taking, however, an. average instance, namely, the 
finishing of a 2-year-old or older steer of the choice 
grade weighing 1000 pounds, fattened in six months 
from purchase, when the ration is corn and a good qual- 
ity of clover or alfalfa hay, 55 to 66 bushels of corn and 
one ton of hay will be required. If the corn is supple- 
mented with some nitrogenous supplement, like oil meal 

14 



BUYING FEEDING CATTLE 15 

or cottonseed meal, slightly less corn will be needed. 
If other roughages than clover and alfalfa aie used, 
such as corn stover and straw, then less clover will be 
required. If cattle are on grass the acreage required 
will depend upon the extent to which grain is fed and 
the quality of the grass. Knowing approximately the 
amount of feed produced that is available for feeding 
cattle, the feeder is thus in a position to know about 
how many cattle he can feed advantageously. 

In regard to the number the cattle feeder 
should feed, the writer wishes to emphasize the fact 
that cattle feeding is a business that lends itself most 
advantageously to extensive practice and methods. In 
other words, the cattle feeder who does not feed at least 
a carload is greatly handicapped when it comes to sell- 
ing — so much so that we do not advise the finishing 
of cattle in less than car lots. This same thought car- 
ried a little further means that the cattle feeder who is 
in a position to feed even more than one carload has a 
distinct advantage over the one-carload feeder. As a 
rule, he saves on freight, labor, and purchased feeds. 
Further than this, he has an opportunity to more evenly 
grade his cattle to the advantage of the more timid and 
smaller cattle in the feed lot. Again, some cattle finish 
more quickly than others, and the extensive feeder has 
the opportunity to select a load of this kind and market 
them as soon as they are ready. The one-load feeder 
is likely to have one or more steers that are not finished, 
a few that may be considerably fatter than the majority, 
enough so, at least, to make the load look uneven, and, 
as a result, sell unsatisfactorily. 

Successful beef production usually comes as a reward 
to those who have made a close study of the business 
and have pursued it sufficiently long to render them keen 
to take advantage of every favorable opportunity that 
presents itself, whether it be drought or flood, for buying 
to advantage. They aim to buy when, for whatever 
reason, they can get the best quality for the least money. 



16 BEEF PRODUCTION 

They frequently buy something a little different from 
their choice because of circumstances that render another 
grade or condition of cattle manifestly cheaper. No 
two seasons are precisely alike, hence the successful 
cattle feeder is resourceful and far-seeing. 

In addition to the question of soil fertility already 
discussed, the conditions most likely to influence farm- 
ers to feed cattle are: large crops commonly used in 
finishing cattle, especially when the cash market for such 
products rules low; high prices for fat cattle; low prices 
prevailing for stockers and feeders; and the prosperity 
of neighboring cattle feeders. 

In some ways, all of these are treacherous guides to 
follow. If abundant crops are followed by correspond- 
ingly cheap corn and roughage, cheap gains are assured 
where these feeds are administered by intelligent hands. 
Cheap feeds, however, have a tendency to create an 
abnormal demand for stock and feeding cattle as a re- 
sult of which, prices for such stock are apt to rise — at 
times above a point where the cattle feeder can afford 
to handle them. Notwithstanding this fact, more cattle 
are put on feed at such times than usual, and, because 
of the cheap feed, there is a tendency for feeders to hold 
longer and make them better. 

The inevitable result of an abundant supply of well 
finished beeves is to cheapen them, so that when feeds 
are abundant and relatively cheap the cattle feeder 
must guard against buying them at prohibitive prices, 
and with the feeling that prices at such times are more 
likely to go lower than higher. Whether or not pre- 
vailing low prices for stockers and feeders should be 
a potent influence in determining • the extent of cattle 
feeding operations will depend largely upon the general 
status of the cattle industry, business conditions, and 
probable price of feeds. 

Of all the hazardous guides followed by the prospect- 
ive cattle feeder, that of the prosperity of a neighbor 
feeder is most hazardous. Farmers unaccustomed to 



BUYING FEEDING CATTLE 17 

fattening cattle have seen a neighbor make money in the 
business for three or four consecutive years and conclude 
that they too can do likewise. Quite often the next 
year and the next prove unfavorable for the cattle feeder, 
and the beginner, confronted with this obstacle in ad- 
dition to his lack of experience, loses considerable money 
that he can ill afford to lose. Many well-informed cattle- 
men make it a rule to feed a certain number of cattle 
each year without much regard to changing conditions. 
This seems the safer rule, provided conditions are not 
such as to make it possible to know at the outset that 
the business can not be engaged in without loss. Cer- 
tain it is that such a policy is far wiser than one which 
involves going in and out of the business with an effort 
to follow market and other conditions. 

WHEN, WHERE, AND HOW TO MAKE PURCHASES OF 
FEEDING CATTLE 

If we were able to make a definite statement as to 
when, where, and how to buy feeding cattle that 
could be followed in all seasons and under all conditions, 
we know the information would be of inestimable value 
to the cattle feeders of the country. Experienced cattle 
feeders understand, however, that such statements, if 
made at all, would need to be qualified by many excep- 
tions. No attempt will be made to give rules for the 
guidance of buyers of feeding cattle, but rather some of 
the more important factors affecting these questions 
will be discussed sufficiently to make it possible for the 
individual to come to an intelligent decision in these 
matters after becoming thoroughly familiar with local 
and market conditions. 

WHEN TO BUY 

The best time to buy is when the cattle can be bought 
the cheapest, all things considered. This is easily said, 
but it is, indeed, difficult to know for any certain season 
when that time will come. A reasonably favorable 



18 BEEF PRODUCTION 

time may be allowed to pass by the cattle feeder be- 
cause he believes there will come a better time. Then, 
too, the majority feel that they must buy about a cer- 
tain time in order to use economically available pastur- 
age or roughage. The most common practice is to buy 
feeding cattle in the fall and early winter. It is believed 
that two-thirds of the feeding cattle are purchased dur- 
ing the fall and early winter months. This fact has 
come about naturally enough. Breeders of feeding 
cattle usually unload before winter sets in. If the sea- 
son has been favorable, rendering pasturage abundant, 
and if winter does not set in until late, liberal arrivals 
of feeding cattle are likely to be late in reaching the 
feeding cattle markets. On the other hand, if a general 
drought or other unfavorable conditions prevail, it will 
cause a liberal marketing of cattle, which generally 
results in cheaper values for thin stock. Besides the 
cheapness of feeding cattle at seasons when cattle are 
plentiful, there is that other important advantage of 
being able to select more uniform feeders. There is, of 
course, the seeming necessity of purchasing feeding cattle 
in the fall or early winter if a large amount of roughage 
is to be used for the maintenance of cattle and the 
production of beef. Practically all those who do not 
buy their feeding cattle in the fall buy in the spring. 
The market at this season is usually higher, but where 
cheap roughage and good winter quarters are not avail- 
able it is usually better practice to pay the extra prices 
in the spring than to attempt to winter such cattle 
under unfavorable conditions that are sure to render 
the practice unprofitable. 

WHERE TO BUY 

The answer to this question will depend largely upon 
the locality in which the cattle are to be fed and the ex- 
tent to which the feeder is engaged in the business. Ex- 
tensive cattle feeders, and by this we refer to those who 



BUYING FEEDING CATTLE 19 

feed 100 or more cattle at a time, prefer the market or 
range as a source of supply. There are obvious reasons 
for doing so. As a rule, it is impossible to get together 
locally a large number of well-bred feeding cattle that 
are uniform in age, type and condition. Buying on the 
range or in the market frequently effects a saving of 
time. By taking advantage of a glut in the mar- 
ket or a lack of demand, the large cattle feeder is able 
to buy cheaper than he could in the country, as it is gen- 
erally true that country prices do not fluctuate to the 
same extent as do market values. Good practice in 
beef production cannot, however, be established by 
assuming that abnormal conditions which will be favor- 
able to the beef producer will always occur. Where 
local buying, either for the large or small feeder, is 
possible, it has distinct advantages, among which are a 
saving on freight, shrinkage, commission, and other 
expenses incident to buying; the breeding and normal 
condition of the cattle may be better determined, no 
bruising or gaunting incident to shipping, and finally, 
no acclimatization is necessary. 

HOW TO BUY 

It is assumed that the buyer in quest of feeding cat- 
tle knows what he wishes and approximately what he 
ought to pay for it. In case the source of his supply 
must come from the market it is wise to get in commu- 
nication with some good live-stock commission company 
considerably in advance of the time the cattle are need- 
ed. Commission companies do not know, nor do they 
assume to know, everything. They do have oppor- 
tunities of getting information on a wide range of 
subjects that are of utmost importance to cattle 
feeders. The permanency and success of their busi- 
ness depend upon the thoroughness with which they 
gather, interpret and dispense this information for the 
benefit of those whom they serve. They are not always 
able to tell from a feeder's description just what kind of 



20 BEEF PRODUCTION 

cattle he wishes to buy, hence a visit to the market by 
the feeder and a trip of inspection around the yards 
with the feeder buyer is advised in order to familiarize 
him with just the kind of cattle wanted. It is best, 
where possible, to aid in the selection of the cattle to be 
purchased, but when it comes to buying, the commission 
company can be of great help, because their daily con- 
tact with the work makes them quicker and more 
accurate in their judgment of values, weights and condi- 
tion. They are frequently able to save many times 
their commission by being able to buy cheaper. 

Good market reports with ably edited comments on 
the general crop and market conditions should be fre- 
quent visitors in every cattle feeder's home, and these 
should be carefully studied. 



CHAPTER III. 

THE VARIOUS GRADES OF FEEDING CATTLE 
DESCRIBED 

The ability to select stockers and feeders intelligent- 
ly is one of the first and most important lessons for the 
stockman to learn. Profits in steer feeding come not 
so much from skill in feeding and management as from 
intelligent buying and selling. The possibility of profit 
resulting from an increase during the fattening period 
of the value per pound of the initial weight of the an- 
imal is as great as is that resulting from the method em- 
ployed in the feeding and managment. It is seldom 
possible to produce at a profit gains which do not in- 
crease the value per pound of the animal. Hence the 
importance of intelligent buying, or the selection of 
feeders and stockers of good quality. 

FANCY SELECTED FEEDERS 

Relatively, very few of this grade of stockers and feed- 
ers find their way to market. Breeders in any of the 
cattle feeding sections fortunate enough to own thinnish 
steers of such quality usually hold them until finished 
as prime bullocks, or sell them at home to feeders at 
good, strong prices, avoiding the expenses incident to 
shipping. Fancy selected feeders must not only possess 
the characteristics of choice feeders, but they must be 
uniform in color, give unmistakable evidence of being 
high grades of some one of the beef breeds, and they are 
almost invariably better fleshed than feeders of the good 
to choice grades. Fancy selected stockers and feeders 
are to the stocker and feeder class what prime steers are 
to the beef cattle class — the best grade within the class 
— and practically above adverse criticism. 

21 



22 



BEEF PRODUCTION 

CHOICE FEEDERS 



Steers of this grade will, like those of the fancy se- 
lected grade, under proper management, develop into 
choice and prime steers. It would seem wise, therefore, 
to consider in detail their desirable characteristics. 

It may be said, then, that we demand in choice 




Fig. 1. Fancy Selected Feeder. 

stockers and feeders, first, the ability to finish as choice 
or prime steers; and second, the ability to make econom- 
ical gains in flesh and fat. As far as our present knowl- 
edge of the matter goes, we look for indications of these 
tendencies in the form, quality, and constitution. 

1. Form — The general form should be low-set, 
deep, broad, and compact, rather than high up, gaunt, 
narrow and loosely made. Stockers and feeders should 
be low-set, or on short legs, because animals of this con- 
formation are almost invariably good feeders and ca- 
pable of early maturity. They should be deep, broad 



CHOICE FEEDERS 23 

and compact, because this conformation indicates good 
constitution, capacity for growth and for producing 
ultimately a relatively high percentage of the most val- 
uable cuts. Select feeders with broad, flat backs and 
long, level rumps. They should possess straight top 
and underlines which should be nearly parallel; should 
be low at the flanks, thus forming what we have spoken 
of above as good depth, for the barrel of stockers and 
feeders as well as clairy cows should be roomy. An 
animal which is too paunchy, however, is objectionable 
to the butcher. 

Secure as much- smoothness of outline as is consistent 
with low flesh, being especially careful to avoid too great 
prominence in hips, tailhead, and shoulders. Avoid 
rough, coarse heads with small eyes set in the side of the 
head. Short, broad heads and short, thick necks in- 
dicate strong tendencies toward beef making. A large, 
prominent, and mild eye is to be desired. The mild eye 
denotes that the animal has a quiet disposition, which 
all feeders know is so desirable in a steer intended for 
the feed lot. The lower jaw should be heavily coated 
with muscle; the muzzle, lips, and mouth should be 
large but not coarse. 

2. Quality — It is well to distinguish between what 
might be called (a) general quality and (b) handling 
quality. 

(a) General quality. By general quality is meant 
general refinement of external conformation as seen in 
the head, horn, bone, compactness and smoothness of 
outline. General quality is affected by nothing so 
much as by breeding; in fact, the two are very closely 
associated. Good quality is seldom found in a plainly 
bred steer, but is generally characteristic of a well 
bred animal. The desirability of general quality can- 
not be too strongly emphasized. While it is a charac- 
teristic that involves many points and is difficult to 
describe, its presence or absence is quickly discerned 
by the trained eye of the intelligent buyer. It is this 



24 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



characteristic in the stockers and feeders more than 
any other that we depend upon as indicating that the 
animal has within it the possibility of making a. prime 
steer. 

(b) Handling quality. Good handling quality in- 
dicates that the possessor is a good feeder. It shows 
that the animal is in good health or thrifty and capable 



..■.■.■ 




. 



Fig. 2. Choice Feeder. 

of beginning to gain as soon as an abundance of food is 
supplied. We speak of cattle as possessing good 
handling quality when the skin is mellow and loose. 
A thick, mossy coat of hair of medium fineness and a 
moderately thick skin are also desirable. 

3. Constitution — The points indicative of good 
constitution have practically been covered under Form. 
Good constitution is indicated by a wide, deep chest, by 
fullness in the heart-girth, depth and breadth of body, 
and good handling quality. While we want refinement 
of form and bone, otherwise spoken of as general quality, 



CHOICE FEEDERS 25 

we do not want that refinement carried to the point of 
delicacy. Too much refinement means delicacy or a 
lack of constitution, and no animal lacking in constitu- 
tion should find its way into the feed lot. 

In the interest of uniformity in the finished product 
it should be observed that high-grade Herefords can 
usually be put on the market in the fewest number of 
days of full feed but suffer most from carrying beyond 
the point of ripeness; that Shorthorns and Aberdeen- 
Angus grades, while a little slower to mature, are in 
fully as strong demand in the market as are grade Here- 
fords; and that Aberdeen- Angus and Galloways may 
be carried longer on full feed than other breeds of beef 
cattle without indications of bunches or rolls of fat, 
which are so strongly discriminated against in our mar- 
kets. 

After all that may be said, however, as to breed, 
the important consideration is to see that the steer 
should be a high grade of some one of the beef breeds 
and that the selection of the individual should receive 
more attention than the selection of the breed. 

The question of age should not be overlooked. A 
thrifty young steer of good weight and in good flesh is 
to be preferred to an older, stunted steer. It should be 
said, however, that a stunted steer of any age or weight 
is a profit spoiler in the feed lot. Uniformity in color 
of feeders is desirable, but the mistake should not be 
made of getting uniformity in color at the expense of 
more important characteristics. It is possible to secure 
good colors, reds and blacks, in steers of very poor 
quality and containing very little beef blood. If it is a 
question of choosing between a combination of good 
quality and correct conformation, and good colors — 
take the quality and conformation, and let some other 
party have the colors. The writer has sometimes thought 
that it is a disadvantage rather than otherwise that 
most registered beef bulls are so prepotent in transmit- 
ting their color markings. A one-eighth blood Here- 



26 BEEF PRODUCTION 

ford may have Hereford markings, or a one-eighth 
blood Angus the color and polled characteristic of the 
pure Angus and have but little beef character. 

Only those most familiar with market conditions 
realize what an almost insignificant proportion of well 
bred fat cattle reach our markets. The bulk of offerings 
are made up of common rough, medium, and good grades 




Fig. 3. Good Feeder. 

of fat cattle, and these must necessarily come from low- 
grade feeding cattle, such as. the inferior, common, 
medium, and good grades, assuming that the better 
grades of feeding cattle, the choice and fancy selected, 
previously described; finish into choice and prime steers. 

GOOD FEEDERS 

Good feeders possess only to a limited degree the 
beef, blood, the thrift, and the conformation of choice or 
selected feeders. It is not difficult to criticise them as 



MEDIUM FEEDERS 27 

somewhat lacking in the most desirable characteristics 
of ideal feeders. They may be too long in the leg, too 
narrow on the back, and either too light or too heavy 
in the bone. Frequently feeders so graded have a 
tendency to be a little rough and coarse. It is generally 
true, however, that steers of this grade kept in the feed 
lot until ripe or finished will, in such condition, grade at 




Fig. 4. Medium Feeder. 

least as high as good beeves, while it is not at all im- 
possible for them to become choice enough in condition 
to grade as choice bullocks. 

MEDIUM FEEDERS 

Medium feeders are only average as to quality and 
thrift. They are usually of lighter weight than the good, 
choice, and selected grades. They generally possess a 
fair amount of beef blood, enough so that their color is 
not objectionable. Their general appearance, so far as 
it indicates their quality and thrift, is rather against 



28 BEEF PRODUCTION 

them, indicating that no matter how judiciously they 
may be handled it will be the exceptional steer among 
them that will develop into anything better than a 
medium or possibly a good bullock. It is seldom 
good practice to finish this grade of feeders. (By 
finish we mean thick fat, such as is required in 
prime steers.) 




Fig. 5. Common Feeder. 

COMMON FEEDERS 

A common feeder is decidedly deficient in quality. 
When the word common is correctly applied to a grade 
of cattle the reader should at once know that that grade 
of cattle is noticeably deficient in quality; it usually 
also indicates a lack of desirable conformation and flesh. 
In speaking of feeders it indicates that such feeders are 
common in quality, common in conformation, and com- 
mon in condition. Like medium feeders, it seldom 
pays to attempt to finish them. 



INFERIOR FEEDING CATTLE 
INFERIOR FEEDERS 



29 



It would seem that a feeder of a lower grade than 
common might more properly be relegated to the level 
of a canner than be permitted the dignity of the name 
inferior feeder. As long, however, as there is sufficient 
demand for inferior feeders they cannot consistently 
be omitted from quotations of the live-stock market. 




Fig. 6. Inferior Feeder. 

Such feeders are rough and angular, largely devoid of 
natural flesh, and possessing the conformation of dairy 
rather than beef-bred animals. In the feed lot they are slow 
feeders and do not make satisfactory bullocks when fat. 

Within all the grades of feeding cattle there are good 
feeders and indifferent ones, the proportion of good ones 
being largest in the better grades, while the proportion of 
indifferent ones is large among the lower grades. This 
suggests that in selecting feeding cattle, no matter of 
what grade, great care should be exercised in selecting 
only such as give evidence of good constitutions and 
feeding qualities. 



CHAPTER IV. 

INCIDENTAL EXPENSES IN TJiE CATTLE 
FEEDING BUSINESS 

FREIGHT AND COMMISSIONS 

In discussing the margins between buying and selling 
prices per hundredweight necessary to insure the cattle 
feeder against loss, freight, commission, and stockyards 
charges are important factors — indeed larger factors 
than they are ordinarily thought to be. The variability 
of freights to and from different sections of the country 
complicates considerably any attempt to make a treat- 
ment of the subject generally applicable. It is believed, 
however, by varying the freight rates and other variable 
items, an approximation of the importance of these 
factors in a given instance may be quite accurately 
determined. The following data have been arranged 
by Mr. L. D. Hall of the Animal Husbandry Depart- 
ment, University of Illinois. 

In November, 1903, the Illinois Experiment Station 
bought on the Chicago market 130 choice feeding steers 
weighing 1006 pounds, at an average cost of $4,267 per 
hundredweight. The freight rate to Champaign (128 
miles from Chicago) on stock cattle is 7.7 cents per 
hundredweight, being three fourths of the fat cattle 
rate. The shrinkage per steer, from market to feed lot, 
was 53.4 pounds. The steers were fed six months and 
gained 480 pounds, feed lot weights, at a cost of 7.23 
cents per pound (not crediting pork produced) on a 
basis of 35 cent corn, $8.00 clover hay, and $24.00 lin- 
seed oil meal. 

When shipped to Chicago in June they shrunk 22.5 
pounds per steer, weighed when sold, 1410 pounds 
average, stood the experiment station at $5.79 per 

30 



INCIDENTAL EXPENSES 31 

hundredweight and sold for $6.10. In this case the 
margin between cost and selling price at market neces- 
sary to balance accounts was $1.52, or $1.01 margin be- 
tween initial and final cost in the feed lot. In other 
words, about one-third of the cost per hundredweight of 
taking a feeder home, fattening, and returning him to 
market consists of freight, shrinkage, commission, and 
stockyards charges. These figures do not include hogs, 
labor, nor manure, which items are treated separately. 

As stated, the average cost per hundredweight of 
the 130 steers was $4,267 in Chicago. The average cost 
at feed lots, just as they came from the cars, was $4,654, 
including freight, commission, feed, and shrinkage. It 
therefore cost $0,387 per hundredweight to get these 
cattle home. Of this expense, $0,257 per hundredweight 
was caused by shrinkage in weight, $0.0817 by freight 
(including $2.00 per car terminal charges), $0.0438 by 
commission and $0,004 by feed bills. 

In order to determine the influence of freight rates 
in calculating the above balance accounts we may use 
a series of freight rates in calculating the above margins, 
using in each case a stocker rate equal to 75 per cent of 
the rate of fat cattle. In that way we find that the 
margins necessary to balance accounts are as follows : 

Freight rates Market margins Feed lot margins 

$0.10 $1.52 $1.01 

0.15 1.60 1.00 

0.20 1.68 .98 

0.25 1.77 .97 

These figures show that a difference of five cents in 
the freight rate on fat cattle involves a corresponding 
difference of about eight cents in the margin necessary 
to come out even. 

It is assumed in the above calculations that the 
shrinkage in shipment to market is the same in each 
instance, viz., 22.5 pounds per steer. If the actual 
transaction described above be used as a basis, and 
various amounts of shrinkage assumed, we may de- 



32 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



termine the effect of that factor on the margin necessary 
to pay out, thus : 

Shrinkage, pounds Margins 

15.0 SI. 49 

22.5 1.52 

25.0 1.53 

50.0 1.64 

75.0 1.75 

This shows that 25 pounds shrinkage per steer 
corresponds very closely to eleven cents per hundred- 
weight in margin required to break even. That is, 
every additional 25 pounds in average shrink means a 
loss of eleven cents per hundredweight on the cattle. 

It is desirable in making estimates on a feeding oper- 
ation to approximate these incidental expenses as 
closely as possible. The following figures are interesting 
as showing the weights on which freight is paid, com- 
pared with the weight of feeders when bought at market 
and their weight on arrival at the feed lots before filling. 
These are from records of feeding steers bought in Chicago 
by the Illinois Experiment Station. 



Lot No. 


Weight in 

pounds at 

market 


Freight 
weight 
charged 


Weight of 
feeders at 
feed lots 


1. . 


23,900 
17,450 
21,260 
24,190 
25,020 
25,130 


24,800 
22,000 
22,000 
24,100 
24,800 
25,000 


22,470 
16,660 
20,080 
22,885 
23,560 
23,900 


2 . . 


3 


4 


5 

6 





Where cars are loaded above the minimum weight, 
and of course they should be, the weight on which freight 
charges is based is ordinarily very near the weight of 
feeders as purchased. This is shown in the above table. 
In the case of fat steers shipped to market, the following 
figures show the weights of a representative carload 
shipped from the Illinois Station : 



LABOR AS A FACTOR 33 

Weight fat steers at feed lot before ship- 
ment (yarded 12 hours) 25,750 pounds 

Weight fat steers at market next day 25,280 pounds 

Weight charged on freight bill 25,500 pounds 

In the latter case we find that the freight charge 
was based on a weight about midway between the home 
and market weights. 

It is important to remember that the expenses here 
discussed are a much larger factor in proportion to the 
investment in feeding lighter cattle than in heavy ones. 
Where the gain is put on at less cost than it sells for, the 
buying and marketing expenses are of greater importance 
and may equal or exceed the entire margin necessary to 
balance accounts. 

At first thought it would seem that the higher the 
price paid for the feeders the less important would be 
the freight and stockyard charges in the operation, but 
such is not the case. For example, if in the above 
transaction the feeders had cost $3 instead of $4,267 
the proportion of the margin required to come out even 
due to buying, shipping, and selling expenses would 
have been 27.6 per cent instead of 33 per cent; and if 
they had cost $5 per hundredweight, the proportion 
would have been 39 per cent. 

LABOR AS A FACTOR IN CATTLE FEEDING 

It has not been the custom in experiment station 
bulletins to make any definite statement as to the im- 
portance of the expense item of labor as compared with 
other necessary disbursements. A consideration of the 
subject of labor has usually been dispatched with some 
such statement as, "No charge is made for labor in 
caring for the steers or for bedding; neither is any value 
assigned to the manure made by them. It is believed 
that the agricultural value of the manure intelligently 
preserved and distributed would be sufficient to balance 
the cost of the bedding and labor involved." Labor, 
like many other factors in beef production, is variable. 



34 BEEF PRODUCTION 

The fact that it is a variable factor does not make a 
fairly accurate determination of it in any given instance 
impossible. If, however, we grant the fact that it is a 
variable factor it seems but reasonable to grant that the 
statement, that the fertilizer produced by the cattle 
balances the labor, is not, at best, a very accurate or 
exact one. The summer fattening of cattle on grass is 
economical of labor as compared with winter feeding in 
the dry lot. The self-feeder lessens labor, whether used 
in summer or winter. In feeding large numbers of 
cattle, labor can be economized to much better advantage 
than in feeding small numbers. Stall fattening or stable 
feeding as compared with open shed sheltering involves 
a large amount of labor. Again, the relative location of 
feed, water supply, and cattle and the conveniences for 
getting the feed to the cattle are all important factors. 

In this discussion the writer has charged to the cost 
of the feed the expense of its preparation. That is, 
where corn is reduced to meal the expense of reducing 
the corn to meal is charged to the meal and not to the 
labor involved in feeding the cattle. Likewise chaffing 
hay, where practiced, may be, and is here, added to the 
price of the hay. In this way the labor involved in 
distributing the feed to the cattle is the item under con- 
sideration. 

Experimental evidence relative to this subject is 
wanting; in fact, records of labor involved in the feeding 
of experimental cattle would be of little value, as the 
feeding of cattle in small lots and the recording of 
accurate weights of cattle and feed entail a large amount 
of labor that is in ordinary practice eliminated. For 
the purpose of securing a definite basis from which to 
work, we may assume what has been repeatedly accom- 
plished in practice, that one man and team, or their 
equivalent, can care for and feed 200 cattle together 
with the hogs following. This includes not only feeding 
the grain, but also hauling hay or other roughage to 
the feed lot from nearby stacks or mows, providing 



LABOR AS A FACTOR 35 

bedding, attending to water, and looking after the wants 
of steers affected with injuries, lump-jaw, lice, and itch. 
With this assumption as a basis the following statement 
is possible : 

Man, 6 mo. at $40 (wages $25, board $15) $240.00 

Team and wagon, 6 mo. at $40 (maintenance 

$15, feed $25) 240.00 

Total cost labor 6 mo $480.00 

Cost per steer 2.40 

Suppose, again, that we are feeding two carloads of 
steers in such a way that a man and team can do the 
necessary work in two hours daily in connection with 
morning and evening chores. If we charge this time at 
25 cents per hour, it amounts in six months to $90 for, 
say, 40 cattle, or $2.25 per head. If the arrangements 
are such that the same outlay for labor will accomplish 
the feeding of 60 steers, the cost per head will be $1.50, 
and if but 30 head require the same labor, then the cost 
will be $3 per steer. These figures enable us to name 
the approximate labor bill in common winter feeding as 
from $2 to $2.50 per steer, and it is understood of course 
that, other conditions being equal, the greatest efficiency 
of labor can be obtained in feeding large numbers of 
cattle. In comparing these statements with the returns 
from hogs, we may turn to the results of some feeding 
experiments. In one case where 53 pigs followed 130 
steers in ten different lots, the return in pork at $5 per 
cwt. varied from 31.5 cents to $5.57 per steer, the aver- 
age being $2.48. In another test, with pigs following 
meal fed steers, the conclusion was reached that, properly 
managed, the pig may return a credit of approximately 
$2.00 to each steer fed. The pigs in another ex- 
periment, involving 200 steers fed 94 days, made gains, 
which, calculated at $5 per cwt., amounted to $1.20 per 
steer, which may be considered the equivalent of twice 
that amount for a six-months' period. In still another 
test where 250 steers were used the pigs yielded a net 



36 BEEF PRODUCTION 

return of $3.12 per steer on the same basis as above. 
On the whole, then, it appears that the practice of con- 
sidering the items of labor and pork about equal is 
generally not far wrong. It is also quite a general saying 
that the manure produced offsets the labor. We have 
shown in a previous chapter that from $9 to $18 per 
steer has been realized from the manure produced where 
the increase in crop yield is taken into account. The 
figures here presented indicate clearly that no general 
rule should be blindly followed. Such calculations as 
those above outlined are easily made for each proposition 
as it arises, so that guesswork may be almost eliminated 
and a very close approximation reached of what may 
reasonably be expected. 

It is always a problem to what extent to move the 
cattle about in order to save moving feed, and, on the 
other hand, how far one may go profitably in moving 
feed to avoid moving the cattle. The best results, 
measured by gains and finish, require that the cattle 
be kept in their accustomed place and given every care 
regardless of labor. Moving cattle to a strange place 
is a certain handicap to them. The greatest economy 
of labor, on the other hand, is secured by taking the 
cattle to the feed rather than by carrying the feed to the 
cattle. Just where the line is to be drawn between these 
conflicting factors cannot be determined except in each 
case separately. Just here lies the great advantage of 
fattening on grass, especially where the self-feeder is 
used. 



CHAPTER Y. 

SOME BUSINESS PHASES OF CATTLE FEEDING 

RELATION OF COST OF FEEDS TO PROFITS IN 
CATTLE FEEDING 

In attempting to estimate the probable number of 
cattle that will be fed during any given season and the 
probable profit or loss to the cattle feeder, there is no 
factor that is more frequently mentioned than that of 
the cost of feeds. From this we may assume that this 
factor, if not the most important one affecting profits 
in cattle feeding, is certainly one of great importance 
and one that should be thoroughly understood by every 
man engaged in the business of finishing cattle for the 
market. Live stock journals begin as early as July 
and August to anticipate the probable size of the corn 
crop, the probable demand for the same, and the bear- 
ing of these factors on the cost of corn to the cattle 
feeders of the country. 

The cattle feeder is inclined to wait until he can form 
some intelligent opinion as to what the market value 
of corn will be before he decides to what extent he will 
engage in the cattle feeding enterprise. This is well, 
for, other things being equal, the cost of feeds deter- 
mines the cost of gains and the cost of making gains has 
a very direct bearing upon profits and losses in cattle 
feeding. 

A discussion of this subject upon the basis of feeding 
the steers a simple ration like broken ear corn and clover 
hay will be most helpful. At the Illinois Experiment 
Station the writer fed a carload of choice well-bred 
two-year-old Shorthorn feeding cattle from November to 
June, or in other words, during a six-months' winter 
feeding period on broken ear corn and clover hay. 

37 



38 BEEF PRODUCTION 

These cattle weighed approximately 1000 pounds at 
the beginning and made an average daily gain per 
steer for the six months of slightly over two pounds. 
To be exact, the total gain per steer was 386.27 pounds. 
Just enough hogs followed the steers to consume the 
whole corn in the droppings of the steers to advantage. 
No additional feed of any kind was supplied for the 
hogs. In this way it was determined that 74.13 pounds 
gain on hogs was made per steer fed. It took 57.73 
bushels of corn and approximately .8 of a ton of 
clover hay to secure the above gain on steer and pig. 
It is probable that the gains made per unit of feed 
were larger than those usually secured by corn-belt 
cattle feeders. Stated in terms of beef and pork per 
bushel of corn fed it would be 6.69 pounds beef and 
1.29 pounds pork per bushel of corn fed. With these 
figures as a basis, we may assume that it would be 
fair for purposes of this discussion to consider that 
6 pounds of beef and 1.14 pounds of pork (75 
pounds per steer in six months) may be made from 
a bushel of broken ear corn supplemented with clover 
hay where the corn is fed to well-bred two-year-old 
feeding cattle with hogs following them to consume 
the waste. It should be stated that the cattle fed 
were not what would be called fully finished, as they 
sold in the market for $5.95, when the top of the market 
was $6.15 per hundredweight. Had these cattle been 
full fed for a longer time (they were full fed only about 
one hundred and twenty days) the total and average 
daily gains would probably have been larger. 

The writer believes it would not have been difficult 
to have secured an average daily gain of 2.2 pounds per 
steer, or 396 pounds in one hundred and eighty days. 

We have then sufficient data as to gains and feed 
required to produce gains to discuss intelligently the 
subject of relation of the cost of these feeds to profits 
in cattle feeding. To avoid misunderstanding let us 
repeat that we assume that each steer involved in this 



BUSINESS PHASES 39 

discussion makes an average daily gain of 2.2 pounds, 
or 396 pounds for a six-months' winter feeding period, 
that 75 pounds of pork are made from the droppings 
of the steer, that 6 pounds of beef and 1.14 pounds 
of pork are made from each bushel of corn fed, supple- 
mented with clover hay. On this basis it would 
require about 66 bushels of corn, supplemented with 
one ton of clover hay to secure the gains recorded for 
the whole time. 

Granting that we are dealing with a choice 1000- 
lb. feeder that is worth $4.50 per hundredweight in 
the feed lot, the following financial statement might 
be made up : 

DISBURSEMENTS, EXHIBIT A 

One 1000-lb. choice feeder at $4 . 50 per cwt $45.00 

66 bushels corn at 30c. per bushel 19.80 

One ton clover hay at $5 5.00 

Total cost $69.80 

The above " total cost" does not, of course include 
interest on investment or labor, and to simplify the 
discussion it is assumed that the cattle are sold at home, 
thus doing away with marketing expenses. 

For the first statement 30-cent corn and $5 hay is 
taken as about the minimum prices that could be figured 
even from the viewpoint of the cattle feeder who pro- 
duced his feeds. If the choice, well-bred feeding steer 
cost $4.50 per hundredweight in the feed lot and the 
purchaser gets what he pays for and properly finishes 
the steer, he ought to expect $1.25 per hundredweight 
more for the steer at home in the feed lot than cost price 
delivered in the feed lot. 

RECEIPTS, EXHIBIT A 
One 1396-lb. choice to prime steer at $5.75 per cwt. $80.27 
75 pounds pork at $5 per cwt 3.75 

Total receipts $84.02 

Total expenditures 69.80 

Profit per steer on basis of 30c. corn and $5 hay . .$14.22 



40 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



The following table, figured out in the same manner, 
shows the effect of price of feeds on possible profits: 



EXHIBIT B 



Assumed price 
of corn 
per bu. 



30 
.35 

.40 
.50 
.60 



Assumed 

price of 

hay per ton 



$5.00 
7.50 
10.00 
10.00 
10.00 



Disburse- 
ments 



$69.00 
75.60 
81.40 
88.00 
94.60 



Receipts 



Profit per 
steer 



$84.02 
84.02 
84.02 
84.02 
84.02 



$14.22 
8.42 
2.62 

—3.98* 
—10.58* 



Net cost lb. 

gain — pork 

credited 



.053 

.068 
.082 
.099 
.116 



* These figures represent losses. 

This table does not mean that profits in cattle feeding 
are impossible when corn is worth over 40 cents per 
bushel, with clover hay at $10 per ton. It does mean, 
however, that with the conditions stated that a larger 
at-home margin between buying and selling price than 
$1.25 per hundredweight is required to make the 
enterprise profitable. 

RELATION OF INITIAL WEIGHTS OF FEEDING CATTLE 
TO PROFITS ON FINISHED BEEF 

The initial weight of feeding cattle has a direct 
bearing upon possible profits in cattle feeding. In 
practice it is difficult to secure examples where differences 
in initial weight of feeding cattle selected for the feed 
lot are the only differences. In other words, it is not 
Jikely that a 750-lb. feeding steer will be of the same 
age, thrift, condition, quality, and price as a 1050-lb. 
steer. In most instances, differences other than differ- 
ences in initial weight would also have a direct bearing 
upon the feeding qualities and possibilities of feeding 
cattle. In order, however, to make clear the principle 
involved in variations in initial weight of feeding cattle 
it will be necessary to assume that we are dealing with 
this factor only. Perhaps the best way to consider this 



BUSINESS PHASES 41 

question is to compare two financial statements, one on 
the basis of starting with the 800-lb. feeder, and the 
other a 1000-lb. feeding steer. Assuming that the total 
gains and cost of gains would be the same in either case, 
the statement would be something as follows : 

One 800-lb. choice feeding steer at $4 . 50 per cwt ... $36.00 

66 bushels corn at $0.40 per bushel 26.40 

One ton clover hay at $7 . 50 per ton 7.50 

Total disbursements $69.90 

Credit 75 pounds pork at $5 per cwt 3.75 

Net cost of steer at time of marketing $66.15 

Granting that the 800-lb. feeder would gain 405 
pounds in a six-months' feeding period, during which 
time each steer received 66 bushels of corn and one ton 
of hay, the steer, when finished and ready for the mar- 
ket, would weigh 1205 pounds. According to the state- 
ment of expenditures made above, this 1205-lb. steer 
would have cost at time of marketing $66.15, and in 
order that the cattle feeder should come out even, that 
is, neither make nor lose by the enterprise, the steer 
would have to net approximately $5.49 per cwt. in the 
feed lots at home. Since it was assumed that the steer 
cost $4.50 per hundredweight this would mean a $.99 
margin between buying and selling price. For sake of 
comparison, let us now assume that we buy a 1000-lb. 
feeding steer, of the same quality, for finishing: 

One 1000-lb choice feeding steer at $4.50 per cwt . .$45.00 

66 bushels corn at $.40 per bushel 26.40 

One ton clover hay at $7.50 per ton 7.50 

Total disbursements $78.90 

Credit 75 pounds pork at $5 per cwt 3.75 

Net cost of steer at time of marketing $75.15 

Starting with a 1000-lb. steer that gains 405 pounds 
in six months, a 1405-lb. steer is produced, which to 



42 BEEF % PRODUCTION 

meet above disbursements, would have to sell for 
about $5.34, or 84 cents per hundredweight above cost. 
Putting it in another way, it might be said that other 
things being equal a 1000-lb. feeding steer can be finished 
on a 15-cent smaller margin than a steer weighing but 
800 pounds at the start. The reader should bear in 
mind that in making these financial statements the 
writer has adopted for demonstrating this and other 
phases of the cattle-finishing business one of the simplest 
methods of feeding calculated to produce cheap gains, 
and where cheap gains prevail as has been shown, the 
necessary margin between buying and selling price is 
reduced to the minimum. The labor involved and 
interest on investment is not charged, nor is any credit 
given for fertilizer produced. 

Perhaps the importance of this factor would be more 
quickly seen if the first-named example were taken, viz., 
a comparison of the 800 and 1000-lb. feeding steers. 
Suppose when the cattle are marketed a $1.50 per hun- 
dredweight margin over cost price is secured in each 
instance, then the total value of the (800 plus 405 equals 
1205-lb.) steer would be $72.30. The net cost of 
this steer, including feed, less value of pork product, was 
$66.15. This would leave a profit per steer of $6.15. 
In case of the 1000 plus 405 equals 1405-lb. steer, 
the value at marketing time would be $84.30. The net 
cost was $75.15, leaving a profit per steer of $9.15; this 
item alone then showing a difference in profit of $3 per 
steer. 

The following table shows the effect of differ- 
ences in initial weight of feeding cattle from 700 to 1200 
pounds : 



BUSINESS PHASES 



43 



Initial Weight of Feeding 


700 


800 


900 


1000 


1100 


1200 


Cattle 


lbs. 


lbs. 


lbs. 


lbs. 


lbs. 


lbs. 


Initial cost of steer at 














$4.50 per cwt 


$31.50 


$36.00 


$40.50 


$45 00 


$49.50 


$54.00 


Net cost of feed (total 














cost less $3 . 75 for pork) 


30.15 


30.15 


30.15 


30.15 


30.15 


30,15 


Final cost of fat steer per 














cwt 


5.60 


5.49 


5.41 


5.35 


5.29 


5.25 


Margin required between 




buying and selling price, 














home or feed4ot values 














and weights 


1.079 


.989 


.914 


.849 


.792 


.746 


Difference in cents in 














margin necessary be- 














tween each weight .... 


0.00 


8.95 


7.58 


6.51 


5.64 


4.62 


Total difference in cents 














between 700 lb. and 














each larger weight .... 


0.00 


8.95 


16.53 


23.04 


28.68 


33.30 



COST PRICE OF VARIOUS GRADES OF FEEDING 
CATTLE IN RELATION TO PROFITS 

In determining what quality of cattle will be most 
profitable to feed, there is one consideration not gener- 
ally understood. A brief statement of the principle 
involved is likely to be questioned. The principle re- 
ferred to is as follows: The lower the price at which 
feeding cattle are purchased, whether because of pre- 
vailing low prices for feeders, or because of the low 
grade of the cattle, the larger must be the margin be- 
tween the buying and selling price in order to secure 
protection against loss. As suggested, this principle 
applies not only to the purchase of feeders of various 
market grades at prices differing materially, but to the 
purchase of feeders of the same grade at different prices. 

The following table shows to what extent this 
principle operates: 



44 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



Market Grades of Feeders 



Fancy 
selected 



Choice 



Good 



Me- 
dium 



Com- 
mon 



Infe- 
rior 



Assumed cost per cwt in 
feed lots 

Total cost of 1000-lb. 
feeder at above prices . . 

Net cost of feed, or cost of 
feeds for finishing, less 
value of pork produced 

Total net cost of si eer at 
marketing 

Weight of steer at time of 
marketing, lbs 

What steer must sell for 
per cwt. at home to 
insure cattle feeder 
against loss. 

Necessary margin above 
cost price to insure 
against loss 



$4.50 
45.00 

30.15 
75.15 
1405 

$5.35 
.85 



$4.15 
41.50 

30.15 
71.65 
1405 

$5.10 
.95 



$3.80 
38.00 

30.15 
68.15 
1405 

$4.85 
1.05 



$3.45 
34.50 

30.15 
64.65 
1405 

$4.60 
1.15 



$3.10 
31.00 

30.15 
61.15 
1405 

$4.35 
1.25 



$2.75 
27.50 

30.15 
57.65 
1405 

$4.10 
1.35 



It is obvious that the writer could not determine a 
set of values that would obtain in all markets and in all 
seasons. The assumed values are sufficiently close to 
average feed lot conditions to render them valuable for 
illustrating an important principle. It is assumed that 
the steers of the various grades make the same gains in 
a given time on a given amount of feed. As a matter 
of fact, the better grades will eat more and gain more 
rapidly than the commoner grades. However, if there 
was only the one varying factor and that the cost per 
hundredweight of the feeders the principle enunciated 
would hold. 

That there should be a difference in margin required 
between buying and selling price to come out even of 
50 cents per hundredweight in this instance and ap- 
proximately 30 cents per hundredweight where all vary- 
ing factors are taken into consideration would scarcely 
be realized by the casual observer. 

The reader is cautioned, however, not to misinter- 
pret the principle. It clearly shows that a greater 
margin is necessary with the cheaper cattle. The 



BUSINESS PHASES 45 

writer does not presume to discuss at this time as to 
whether or not margins sufficiently large to balance or 
more than balance the requirement are likely to follow 
the finishing of low-grade steers to render their fattening 
a more profitable enterprise than the feeding of the 
better grades. In general, however, the extreme differ- 
ences between the various grades of feeding cattle tend 
to become less marked as the feeding process goes on. 
That is to say, the differences in quality between the 
various grades of feeding cattle are more pronounced 
than differences between the various grades of beef or 
fat cattle. 

Buying feeding cattle is almost the first, if not the 
first, step to be taken in cattle feeding. The amateur 
cattle feeder seldom appreciates the importance of this 
factor in determining ultimate profits. The veteran 
feeder has learned by costly experience that unless he 
buys his feeding cattle right, that is, unless he gets good 
value for his money, all possible hope for profit has been 
destroyed before the real work of finishing begins. # If 
the beginner appreciates the importance of right buying 
he-seldom possesses adequate knowledge of the relative 
and absolute values of the various grades of feeding 
cattle. 



CHAPTER VI. 
WINTERING STOCKERS AND FEEDERS 

The writer is unable to present any statistics indi- 
cating the percentage of cattle purchased for feeding 
purposes that are simply " wintered' ' principally upon 
roughage with a view of finishing subsequently on grass. 
It is generally known, however, that a large majority 
of the cattle purchased for fattening are purchased in 
the fall and early winter months, and more than half 
of these are bought with a view of wintering them as 
cheaply as possible and then fattening on grass. The 
reasons for this system of management are not far to 
seek. 

On the average corn-belt farm there are stalk fields 
and straw stacks from which little if any revenue is 
secured unless used in wintering cattle. In other sec- 
tions straw, clover-hay and other roughages do not find 
a ready cash market, and because of this some other 
disposition is made of them. Wintering cattle for sub- 
sequent fattening on grass seems to be the most popular 
channel through which to convert these feeds into cash. 
Summer fattening is usually more profitable than winter 
fattening and is much more generally practiced. Those 
in possession of good pasturage wish to make the best 
use of it and consequently do not feed liberally of corn 
or other concentrates during the winter months. In 
this connection it may be stated that, as a general prop- 
osition, the more cattle gain on concentrated feeds in 
winter the less they will gain on grass in the summer. 
That is to say, if corn is fed liberally during the winter 
months, the cattle will not make as large gains when 
turned to grass as they would were they wintered largely 
on roughage and not the best of roughage at that. Dif- 

46 



WINTERING FEEDERS 47 

ferent systems of management should undoubtedly be 
recommended for cattle varying in age and quality. 
The wintering of calves and yearlings intended for baby 
beef will be considered in a subsequent chapter. This 
narrows the subject in hand to the wintering of yearlings, 
two-year-olds, and older feeding cattle that are to be 
finished on grass in summer. 

ROUGHING STEERS AN ART 

Experienced cattle feeders will concede that it is one 
of the fine points of the cattle feeding business to know 
just how well to winter such cattle. Local conditions 
as to the extent, nature, and value of pasture lands deter- 
mine to a large extent what is good practice in any par- 
ticular instance. Where abundant pasturage of the 
best quality is available on cheap lands, feeding cattle 
may very properly be wintered largely on roughage with- 
out any effort on the part of the cattle feeder to secure 
large gains. But if pasturage is limited and the value 
of such pasture lands is great, then some combination 
of feeds well calculated to produce satisfactory gains 
should be used. 

The writer believes that there is a growing tendency 
over a large part of the corn-belt, where these conditions 
prevail, to feed cattle more liberally than formerly and 
that this tendency is in harmony^ with good practice. It 
is rarely economy to carry stockers or feeders a consid- 
erable time on a mere maintenance allowance, even 
though the subsequent gain on grass be thereby 
increased. 

As bearing on this general subject of wintering feed- 
ing cattle some interesting records of the Missouri station 
are quoted. The results in feeding all the roughage 
of various kinds that yearling steers would eat with 
corn in varying quantities produced the following results 
in three successive years ; 



48 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



Kinds of Roughage 


Date of Trial 


Pounds 

hay per 

steer daily 


Pounds 

shelled corn 

per steer 

daily 


Av. daily 
gain per 
steer in 
pounds 


Timothy 


1899-1900 

1901 

1901-2 

1901 

1901-2 

1899-1900 

1901 

1901-2 


16.7 
15.4 
16.9 
17.9 
19.0 
19.0 
12.3 
16.9 


4 
6 
6 
6 
6 
4 
6 
6 


.65 


Timothy 


1.00 


Timothy . . ... 


1.37 


Clover. 

Clover 

Cow-pea 

Millet 

Alfalfa 


2.00 
1.92 
1.54 
.37 
1.63 



These records graphically show the value of clover, 
alfalfa, and cow-pea hay as compared with other rough- 
ages when used as a supplement to corn for wintering 
cattle. It would seem from the experiments quoted 
that from 4 to 6 pounds of shelled corn per steer per 
day fed in conjunction with all the good clover, alfalfa, 
or cow-pea hay the steers will eat makes an ideal feed 
for wintering feeding cattle and that the use of timothy 
and millet hay will be followed by unsatisfactory results. 
The writer does not forget that the larger winter gains 
will undoubtedly make the gains on grass in summer 
somewhat less, but it should be remembered that these 
gains were made on a ration a large percentage of which 
was roughage. These records are valuable as further 
indicating the amounts of the various roughages such 
cattle will consume when fed all they will take. 



CHAPTER VII. 

GETTING CATTLE ON FEED 

It not infrequently happens that steers intended for 
the feed lot are left to roam about the stalk fields longer 
than it is profitable to do so. Feeding cattle should 
be taken from stalk fields and pastures before they 
cease thriving under such management. How the steers 
should be handled subsequently will depend largely 
upon the age, grade, and condition of the steers, when 
they are to be marketed, and the most available feeds. 

The majority of cattle coming from pastures a d 
stalk fields will not be finished for market in less than 
150 days, while many of them will be carried through 
the winter on rough feed as cheaply as possible and 
turned to grass in the spring at a time when they are 
practically on full feed. 

The cattle which are to be marketed after being 
turned to grass in the spring should be handled differ- 
ently from those that are to be sold earlier. (See chap- 
ter XV., Fattening Cattle on Grass.) 

PLANS VARY SOMEWHAT 

Those who are familiar with cattle feeding practice 
know that there is much difference of opinion as to the 
length of time which should be employed in getting cat- 
tle on full feed. The majority of cattle feeders, I believe, 
practice a system of feeding which involves the getting 
of the cattle on full feed in from ten days as the mini- 
mum to thirty days as the maximum length of time. 
The minority take what appears to be a more rational 
view of this question and use from thirty days at the 
least to sixty days at most for getting cattle on feed. 
Both methods have their advantages and disadvan- 

49 



50 BEEF PRODUCTION 

tages, which at present must be stated more as opinion 
than as a result of deductions from actual experiments 
covering a comparison of these methods, although at 
the Illinois Station both these systems have been tested, 
and there is an experiment now in progress at the station 
referred to inquiring into this very question. First, it 
should be said that both methods are followed with vary- 
ing success. Cattle may be put on full feed in from 
fifteen to thirty days without apparent injury. The 
advantage of this method is a saving of time or a short- 
ening of the feeding period. It contributes to larger 
gains during the first part of the feeding period, and, 
taking the whole feeding period together, it is believed 
to induce a larger consumption of concentrates and a 
consequent smaller proportion of roughages. With this 
system of feeding the gains grow smaller and more ex- 
pensive during the latter part of the feeding period, 
provided the same extends five months or more of full 
feeding and provided aged rather than young cattle are 
involved. 

AS TO SHORT-FED CATTLE 

In dealing with short-fed cattle, getting cattle on 
full feed in fifteen to twenty days is undoubtedly 
advisable, but if cattle are to be in the feed lot six months 
they can be given a very satisfactory marketable finish 
where thirty to forty-five days of that time are employed 
in getting them on full feed. The advantages of this 
method are: The ration is at first made up of such 
bulk as to permit the steers eating all they wish without 
any danger of getting the cattle off feed or deranging 
the digestive organs. The grain ration is so gradually 
increased that the steers become accustomed to hand- 
ling a heavier and more highly concentrated ration. This 
method is safer in the hands of the novice. Gains are 
not so large during the first part of the feeding period as 
they are where cattle are put on feed more rapidly, but 
they are still economical as viewed from the standpoint 
of feed consumed to produce this gain. As the feed is 



STARTING CATTLE 51 

increased slowly and regularly the gains increase with 
the extent and concentration of the ration until the 
gains during the last sixty days of a six-months' feeding 
period are just as large and frequently as economical as 
at other periods during the fattening process. Steers 
so handled can be more safely carried beyond the time 
planned to market them in case occasion seems to war- 
rant such holding than they can where started more 
quickly. 

THE AIM OF THE FEEDER 

Where thirty days to six weeks are employed in 
getting cattle on full feed the cattle so handled very 
seldom consume the large amounts of corn and other 
concentrates reported by cattle feeders who practice 
getting cattle on feed more rapidly. The gains made per 
unit of feed consumed are no less than with the quick 
feed method even though a larger proportion of the 
ration consists of roughage. The end and aim of the 
cattle finishing process is, I take it, to get marketable 
finish at the least cost, considering cost of feeds used and 
interest on investment. Economical gains contribute 
very largely in bringing about this result and are, in 
fact, a more important factor than a little extra time, 
which may be required by getting cattle on feed in a 
more rational manner. With good alfalfa or clover 
hay used as roughage it is 'undoubtedly better practice 
to get cattle on full feed more slowly than where corn 
stover, timothy hay, or straw constitute the roughage. 

VALUE OF SUPPLEMENTAL FEEDS 

If for any reason it is desirable to get cattle on feed 
quickly, the supplementing of corn with some nitrogen- 
ous concentrate, like ground linseed cake (oil meal), 
gluten, or cottonseed meal is recommended. Granting 
that not less than thirty days are to be used in getting 
cattle on full feed, the writer would feed the cattle all 
the clover or alfalfa hay they would eat up without 
waste and in addition start with two pounds of corn per 



52 BEEF PRODUCTION 

steer per day, increasing the corn at the rate of one 
pound per steer per day until each steer receives ten 
pounds of corn per day. This ration of corn should be 
continued for three days and then another increase of one 
pound made. From this point on an increase of one 
pound per steer per day every third day will bring the 
cattle up to seventeen pounds of corn each per day in 
thirty days. By continuing this rate of increase for 
fifteen days longer the steers will be getting twenty-two 
pounds each per day. If oil meal or other nitrogenous 
concentrates are used at the rate of about three pounds 
per 1000-lb. steer per day, this ration will prove quite 
satisfactory. When the cattle begin to get about twelve 
to fifteen pounds of corn per steer per day they will 
not require or relish as much roughage, and at the end of 
thirty days should not be given to exceed twelve pounds 
clover or alfalfa per 1000-lb. steer per day. As the feed- 
ing period progresses the amount of roughage fed should 
constitute about one-fourth of the ration by weight. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

FEEDS FOR FATTENING CATTLE; THEIR 
PREPARATION AND USE 

CORN 

That corn is and will be fed more largely than any 
other feed is admitted, hence the knowledge of how it 
can be used most profitably is information that every 
cattle feeder should possess. Corn is fed in many forms, 
such as fodder or shock corn, cornmeal and corn and 
cob meal, and the feeding of corn in each of these 
forms is advocated as the most profitable practice by a 
considerable number of cattle feeders. In some in- 
stances good and sufficient reasons are given for their 
choice, while in other instances statements are made 
which are not borne out by experimental data on the 
subject. It is undoubtedly true that corn is not fed 
most profitably in any one particular form under all 
circumstances and conditions. 

A study of this subject involves the following con- 
siderations : 

1. The efficiency of corn for making beef alone when 
fed in different forms. 

2. Its efficiency for making beef and pork. 

3. The labor involved in preparing and feeding it to 
cattle. 

4. The age of the cattle to be fed. 

5. The season of the year. 

Unfortunately, experimental evidence is lacking on 
some of these points. However, we wish to introduce 
at this point some experimental data gathered by the 
Illinois Experiment Station in feeding 130 choice 
two-year-old feeding cattle during a six-months' winter 
feeding period, leaving other points of interest to sub- 

53 



54 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



sequent pages. In the experiment referred to corn in 
its various forms was supplemented with oil meal or 
gluten meal and clover hay. So, in interpreting the 
records of this test, it should be borne in mind that 
with each bushel of corn the concentrates and clover 
hay mentioned were fed. 

POUNDS GAIN ON STEERS AND STEERS AND 

HOGS PER BUSHEL (SHELLED BASIS) 

SUPPLEMENTED CORN FED 



Form in which corn 
was fed 



Silage, cornmeal. 

Ear corn 

Cornmeal 

Corn and cob meal 
Shock corn, ear 

corn 

Shelled corn .... 



Pounds oil and 

gluten meal fed 

per bu. corn 



10.121 
9.996 

9.878 
9.979 

4.549* 
10.120 



Pounds clover 

hay fed per 

bu. corn 



Pounds of 
gain on 

steers per 

bu. corn 

fed 



24.681f 

27.241 
29.698 
27.613 

22.547f 
30.502 



7.93 
7.92 

8.02 

7.88 

6.41 
6.72 



Pounds of 

gain on 
stesrs and 
hogs per 

bu. corn fed 



8.04 
9.06 
8.39 
8.21 

7.72 
8.74 



* Oil meal fed during the latter part of feeding period only. 
| The roughage accompanying the corn was fed in these lots in 
addition to the clover hay. 

From the accompanying table it will be seen that 
from the standpoint of beef produced per bushel of 
corn fed in the various forms, silage and cornmeal were 
most efficient. 

The results of this experiment indicate that the mere 
matter of grinding shelled or ear corn does not make it 
materially more efficient than broken ear corn for beef 
production, but either cornmeal, corn and cob meal, 
or broken ear corn were considerably more efficient than 
shelled corn for beef production. That ear corn should 
be found more efficient for beef production than corn- 
meal or corn and cob meal is contrary to common belief, 
but this experiment was conducted on such a large 



PREPARATION OF FEEDS 55 

scale and in such a careful manner that the results of it 
are more dependable than opinions or beliefs. The 
great importance of the data in the last column of the 
table should not be lost sight of. In sections of the 
country where beef production is a leading enterprise 
the hog is looked upon as an economic factor and there- 
fore practically indispensable. The amount of gain 
that is made by hogs following steers variously fed is 
therefore one of the deciding factors as to the form 
in which corn may be most profitably fed to cattle. 
By referring to the table it will be noted that the most 
beef and pork combined was made where corn was fed 
in the form of broken ear corn, shelled corn coming next, 
with cornmeal third. The slight difference between 
the final results with cornmeal and corn and cob meal 
leads the writer to believe that they are practically 
equal in feeding value — that is to say, when cattle are 
handled as these were with plenty of good roughage 
and the corn supplemented with some nitrogenous 
concentrate, a bushel of ear corn (70 pounds), fourteen 
pounds of which is cob, when ground into corn and cob 
meal is not materially more valuable for cattle feeding 
than fifty-six pounds of cornmeal. 

The experienced cattle feeder knows that simply 
the statement that one ration will produce more beef or 
more combined beef and pork than another does not 
necessarily decide that its use will be followed with 
greater profit. The question of cost of preparing and 
feeding the same must be taken into account. 'This 
will be considered next. 

PREPARATION OF FEED 

In the experiment referred to the feeds used were 
prepared at the University cattle feeding plant. Both 
the corn and the corn and cob meal were finely ground. 
The shock (fodder) corn and silage used were grown in 
the same field on the University farm, and the plots 
reserved for use were selected with the greatest care, that 



56 BEEF PRODUCTION 

the quality and proportion of grain to stover should be 
the same in each instance. Of the total crop 56.6 per 
cent was grain and 43.4 per cent stover. 

Taking into account depreciation in machinery 
by wear and the actual labor involved, the records 
show that it cost the following amounts to prepare the 
feeds used: 

Per ton. 

Shelling corn $ .34 

Grinding corn for cornmeal 1.20 

Grinding ear corn for corn and cob meal 1.44 

With corn at 35c. per bushel — 

Broken ear corn cost $10 20 

Shelled corn 12.48 

Cornmeal 13.34 

Corn and cob meal 11.44 

Shock corn, including cost of hauling to feed lots. . . 5.40 
Silage, including cost of putting up 2.75 

Good average daily gains were made with corn fed 
in all the various forms, although shelled corn and shock 
corn did not equal other forms. The average daily 
gain per steer for the six-months' feeding period was as 
follows: Silage and cornmeal, 2.34 pounds; broken ear 
corn, 2.33 pounds; cornmeal, 2.38 pounds; corn and 
cob meal, 2.32 pounds; shock corn, 2.08 pounds; and 
for shelled corn, 1.99 pounds. 

The lots fed corn in various forms were fed for the 
same length of time and marketed in Chicago on the 
same day, at which time they were sold at the following 
prices per cwt. : Silage and cornmeal lot, $6.10; broken 
ear corn, $6.15; cornmeal, $6.15; corn and cob meal, 
$6.10; shock corn, $6.05; and the shelled corn lot for 
$6.05. The feeding cattle at the beginning of the test 
cost $4.53 per cwt. in the feed lots and graded as choice. 

To illustrate what an important item the labor 
element is in the preparation of cattle feeds it may be 
stated that the net cost of a pound of gain on the steers 
was in each instance as follows: Silage and cornmeal 



PREPARATION OF FEEDS 



57 



lot, $0,076; broken ear corn $0,067; cornmeal, $0,075; 
corn and cob meal, $0,078; shock or fodder corn, $0,065; 
and in the shelled corn lot, $0,075. Thus it will be 
seen that the cost of a pound of gain is directly influenced 
by the amount of labor that is expended in the prep- 
aration of the corn for feeding. The net profit per 
steer in feeding these cattle corn in its various forms and 
at varying prices follows : 



Price of Feeds 






Corn 


$.35 


$ .40 


$.50 






Clover hay 


$5.00 


$7.50 


$10.00 






Form in which corn was fed 


Net profit per 


steer 


Silage and cornmeal. . . . 


$6.57 

12.07 

8.45 

6.61 

11.46 

7.95 


$2.17 
7.54 
3.66 
2.07 
7.01 
3.14 


— *$4 840 


Broken ear corn 


.333 


Cornmeal 

Corn and cob meal 


—3.750 
—5.150 


Shock or fodder corn 


.125 


Shelled corn 


—1 270 







* — Indicates a loss. 

The results of this experiment clearly indicate that 
simple methods, or, in other words, cattle feeding prac- 
tice involving but a small amount of labor requir.es con- 
siderably smaller margins than do more complicated 
methods involving a large labor element. 

The results of this experiment are so striking that it 
appears that the grinding of corn for feeding choice 
two-year-old steers during the winter season is not war- 
ranted. 

The feeding of silage in moderate quantities is not 
necessarily conducive to heavy shrinkage in shipping or 
small percentages of dressed beef. The reader is cau- 
tioned not to conclude that since the feeding of silage 
was not followed with as large profits as the feeding of 
several other rations, that it has no place in beef pro- 



58 BEEF PRODUCTION 

duction. Its use in growing young cattle and as a part 
of the ration of the breeding herd promises well in the 
hands of the experienced feeder. 

Since the profits in feeding shock or fodder corn and 
ear corn are approximately the same, the writer is in- 
clined to favor the feeding of ear corn in preference to 
fodder corn, because in feeding shock corn one is some- 
times obliged to get on the land when it is too wet. 
This statement applies especially to seasons of the year 
when bad weather is likely to prevail. 

This suggests that there may be a season of the year 
when shock corn can be fed to greater advantage than dur- 
ing mid and late winter. It is doubtful whether there 
is a more profitable way to feed corn than in the form of 
shock or fodder corn, if it is fed during the fall season. 

While the results of this experiment show that it 
does not pay to grind corn for winter feeding, it should 
not be assumed that it does not pay to grind corn for 
cattle that are being fattened in the summer on grass. 
In some instances, too, young cattle are not able to handle 
the ear corn to advantage. Some of the modern im- 
proved varieties of corn are so compact and hard that 
cattle have difficulty in masticating it. Whether or not 
the cattle feeder should use cornmeal or corn and cob 
meal is largely a matter of convenience, what roughage 
is used, how the corn part of the ration is supplemented 
with other concentrates, and perhaps the season during 
which it is used. 

Unless higher prices for fat cattle, or lower prices 
for stock cattle, or both, prevail than in conditions here 
recorded, the possibilities of profit with corn at 40 cents 
per bushel, for example, and clover hay at $10.00 per 
ton are very small indeed. 

THE USE OF COTTONSEED MEAL, GROUND LINSEED 
CAKE OR OIL MEAL, OATS, AND MOLASSES 

It has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the 
writer that in fattening cattle where corn comprises 
the bulk of the ration it pays to supplement it with 



SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDS 59 

some nitrogenous feed either concentrate or roughage. 
Cottonseed meal, ground linseed cake or oil meal, and 
gluten meal are among the most common nitrogenous 
concentrates, while alfalfa, clover, and cow-pea hay are 
nitrogenous roughages. Whether or not it will pay to 
buy nitrogenous concentrates where good clover or 
alfalfa hay is available depends upon the age of the cattle 
to be fed, the price of corn, and the price of cotton seed 
meal, oil meal, or some other available nitrogenous 
concentrate. 

AN ILLINOIS FEEDING EXPERIMENT 
During the winter season of 1903-1904 the Illinois 
Experiment Station fed one carload of two-year-old 
choice feeding cattle on broken ear corn and clover 
hay and another carload of cattle of the same age and 
grade on broken ear corn, clover hay, gluten meal, and 
oil meal (pea size ground linseed cake). These cattle 
were fed for a six-months' feeding period and were well 
finished at time of sale. Feeds were charged at the 
following prices: p er ton 

Ear corn, 35c. per bushel, broken ear corn $10.20 

Oil meal (ground linseed cake, pea size) 24.00 

Gluten meal 29.00 

Clover hay 8.00 

With a ration of broken ear corn and clover hay re- 
sults were as follows : 
Average daily gain per steer in pounds (186 days) . . 2.08 

Pounds pork per steer made by hogs following 62.60 

Pounds gain on steers per bushel corn fed 6.69 

Pounds gain on steers and pigs per bushel corn fed . *7.98 

Net cost of 1 pound gain on steers $.059 

Cost per cwt. of feeders in feed lot. $4.53 

Value per cwt. when marketed $5.95 

Net profit per steer, corn 35c, clover hay $8 per ton. 

Gains in pork credited at $5 per cwt 9.84 

Net profit per steer, corn 40c, clover hay $10 5.68 

*With each bushel of corn fed in this lot there was an average of 
approximately ten pounds of oil meal or gluten meal fed in addition 
to the corn, which of course was not the case where corn was not 
supplemented with a nitrogenous concentrate. 



60 BEEF PRODUCTION 

With broken ear corn, gluten meal, oil meal and 
clover hay : 
Average daily gain per steer in pounds (186 days) . . 2.33 

Pounds pork per steer made by hogs following 74.13 

Pounds gain on steers per bushel corn fed 7.92 

Pounds gain on steers and pigs per bushel corn fed. 9.06 

Net cost of 1 pound gain on steers $.067 

Cost per cwt. of feeders in feed lot $4.53 

Value per cwt. when marketed $6.15 

Net profit per steer, corn 35c, clover hay $8 per ton, 

Gains in pork credited at $5 per cwt 9.75 

Net profit per steer, corn 40c, clover hay $10.00. . . . 5.36 

By referring to the table it will be seen that the steers 
getting the oil meal and gluten meal made larger daily 
gains throughout the feeding period than did those that 
received only broken ear corn and clover hay. This 
result usually follows such practice because the supple- 
menting of corn with a palatable nitrogenous concentrate 
undoubtedly stimulates the appetite and increases the 
capacity of the animal for consuming to advantage large 
quantities of concentrates. This system of feeding is to 
be recommended, therefore, where the securing of a 
quick finish is of more consequence than the somewhat 
increased cost of the gains. 

GAINS MADE BY HOGS 
It has frequently been stated that better gains are 
secured on hogs following steers fed on corn supplemented 
with oil meal than where it is not so supplemented. 
It is possible that in the above statement reference was 
made to the cattle not fed a nitrogenous roughage such 
as clover hay. This test at any rate points to the con- 
clusion that where corn is supplemented with both 
a nitrogenous concentrate and a nitrogenous roughage 
the hogs make smaller gains than where supplemented 
with clover hay only. This is as it should be, for if it 
is true, as is pretty clearly shown by a comparison of the 
pounds of beef made per bushel of corn fed, that the 
supplementing of corn with the concentrated feeds used 



SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDS 61 

in this test increases the efficiency of corn for making 
beef, there must of necessity be less of the corn in the 
droppings of the steers for producing gains on the pigs. 
It is not probable that the pigs get much benefit from 
the undigested portion of these concentrated feeds, 
especially where whole corn is fed. 

A comparison of the cost of gains will bring out 
forcibly the point that the most efficient rations are not 
necessarily the most economical producers of gains. 
Notwithstanding the fact that the cattle receiving the 
oil meal and gluten meal were enough better finished to 
sell in the open market for 20 cents per hundredweight 
more than the ones getting corn as the only concentrate, 
a comparison of the relative profit indicates that with 
feeds at the prices named it matters but little so far as 
visible profits are concerned whether or not the cattle 
feeder uses these nitrogenous feeds for two-year-old cattle 
for winter feeding. In the financial statements given 
no charge has been made for interest on investment in 
cattle, hogs, and equipment, or for labor required, nor 
are the cattle and hogs credited with any fertilizer pro- 
duced. It should not be overlooked, however, that 
while in actual visible returns one ration appears about 
as good as another, as a matter of fact the manure 
from the oil meal or gluten meal fed steers would be con- 
siderably more valuable than that from the steers fed 
corn only. The cost of gains looks low, and it is low 
only because corn is charged at the rate of 35 cents per 
bushel. 

The question of the use of these supplementary feeds 
where clover, alfalfa, or cow-pea hay is not available 
will be considered next. 

NITROGENOUS CONCENTRATES 

It frequently happens that the cattle feeder does 
not have alfalfa or clover hay to use as roughage in 
fattening cattle and must depend upon timothy hay, 
corn stover, or straw. In such instances it becomes a 



62 BEEF PRODUCTION 

pertinent question whether or not it will pay to purchase 
nitrogenous concentrated feeds such as oil meal, cotton- 
seed meal, or gluten meal to add to the ration in order to 
partially or wholly balance it. In presenting the results 
of the following test the writer believes that conclusive 
evidence is available that it does pay. This test was 
conducted at the Illinois Experiment Station during the 
winter of 1902-1903. During this time prices for feeds 
and cattle were extremely high, and in order to make this 
test illustrate the principle involved in this discussion 
the prices of cattle and feeds are reduced to as nearly a 
normal basis as it is possible to make them. The cattle 
used were grade Shorthorns, but of a rather low grade. 
On the market they graded from medium to good feeders, 
weighing about 970 pounds each. Ordinarily such feed- 
ers can be secured in the fall of the year for S3. 80 per 
hundredweight delivered in the feed lots. The cattle 
used in this test were here figured at this price. Feeds 
used were charged at the following prices : 

Shelled corn, 35 cents per bushel; gluten meal, 
$29.00 per ton; timothy hay, $10.00 per ton; and corn 
stover at $4.00 per ton. There were twelve steers in 
each lot, one of which was fed a ration of shelled corn, 
timothy hay, and corn stover; the other, shelled corn, 
gluten meal, timothy hay, and corn stover. From this 
it will be seen that no nitrogenous roughage like clover 
hay was used. The results were as follows- 

FINANCIAL STATEMENT 
Lot 1. Corn, timothy hay, and corn stover. 

DISBURSEMENTS 

To 12 steers, 11,610 pounds at $3.80 per cwt $441.18 

To 225.7 bushels corn at 35c. per bushel 78.99 

To 7.59 tons corn and cob meal at $11.44 per ton. . 86.83 

To .41 ton cornmeal at $13.34 per ton 5.47 

To 5.37 tons timothy hay at $10.00 per ton 53.70 

To 3.17 tons corn stover at $4.00 per ton 12.68 

Expense of feeding in holding last week 13.57 



SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDS 63 

Freight, Champaign to Chicago, commission for sell- 
ing, and other expenses 30.00 

Total disbursements $722.42 

RECEIPTS 

12 steers, 44,063.04 pounds at $5.35 per cwt $752.37 

482 pounds pork at $5.00 per cwt 24.10 

Total receipts $776.47 

Total disbursements, $722.42; profit on twelve steers, 
$54.05; profit per steer, $4.50. 

Lot 2. Corn, gluten meal, timothy hay, corn stover. 

DISBURSEMENTS 

To 12 steers, 11,702 pounds at $3.80 per cwt $444.68 

To 138.27 bushels corn at 35c. per bushel 48.39 

To .64 ton cornmeal at $13.34 per ton 8.54 

To 6.62 tons corn and cob meal at $11.44 per ton . 75.75 

To 2.09 tons gluten meal at $29.00 per ton 60.61 

To 5.96 tons timothy hay at $10.00 per ton 59.60 

To 3.18 tons corn stover at $4.00 per ton 12.72 

Expense of feeding in holding last week 15.42 

Freight, Champaign to Chicago, commission for 

selling and other expenses 30.00 

Total disbursements $755.69 

RECEIPTS 

12 steers, 14,880 pounds at $5.80 per cwt $863.04 

422 pounds pork at $5.00 per cwt 21.10 

Total receipts $884.14 

Total disbursements, $755.69; profit on twelve steers, 
$128.45; profit per steer, $10.70. 

The foregoing financial statement clearly shows that 
in this test where corn was fed with timothy hay and 
corn stover there was a marked advantage in the feeding 
of gluten meal. Similar results would have followed the 
use of oil meal or cottonseed meal in the ration. The 
results are so striking that it leaves little doubt as to the 
advisability of purchasing these concentrated feeds 
where alfalfa, clover hay, or cow-pea hay are not avail- 
able as a supplement to corn for cattle feeding. 



64 BEEF PRODUCTION 

AMOUNT TO FEED 

Where oil meal or cottonseed meal is to be fed there 
are several questions arising which should be briefly 
considered. How much of these commercial concen- 
trates should be fed per animal per day, and how rapidly 
should steers be worked up to the amount to be fed? 
Experience has demonstrated that if one wishes to get 
the largest net profit from feeding these feeds a minimum 
rather than a maximum amount should be used, that is, 
the feeding of two to three pounds per steer per day is 
likely to be followed with larger net profits than the 
feeding of five or more pounds per steer per day with 
feeds at normal prices. The amount that can be fed to 
advantage will, of course, vary with the composition 
of the remainder of the ration. For example, if alfalfa 
and clover hay are used as roughage and the feeding of 
these concentrates is largely a matter of increasing the 
value of the manure, then the maximum amount fed 
should not exceed three pounds per day per 1000 pounds 
live weight of cattle, and it is even possible that the 
most profitable returns are secured by feeding even 
smaller amounts. Where timothy hay, corn stover, or 
straw is used for roughage and corn for the concentrated 
part of the ration, this three pounds becomes the mini- 
mum amount of oil meal, cottonseed meal, or gluten 
meal to be fed daily per 1000 pounds live weight of 
cattle. When corn is high in price and these feeds 
reasonable, as much as four pounds may be fed to ad- 
vantage. These amounts are suggested for two-year-old 
or older cattle. For calves or yearlings one pound per 
1000 pounds live weight of cattle more than that stated 
for older cattle will be found a good rule to follow. 
Cattle should be started on these feeds at the rate of one- 
fourth pound per day per animal, increasing them at 
the rate of one-eighth pound per day until the cattle 
receive the required amount. 



SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDS 65 

HOGS FOLLOWING STEERS FED COTTONSEED MEAL 

Much has been said concerning the clanger to hogs 
following steers fed on cottonseed meal. Undoubtedly 
this danger has been greatly exaggerated. The writer 
has yet to learn of a single instance of injury to hogs 
following steers fed cottonseed meal in the amounts 
recommended above, where reasonable care was exer- 
cised in not allowing the pigs access to the meal before 
it passed through the cattle. 

SUMMER FATTENING 

While cottonseed meal furnishes an excellent supple- 
ment to the corn plant for winter fattening of steers it 
can be used to greater advantage as a supplement to 
corn in fattening cattle on grass. As to palatability, 
oil meal conies first, then cottonseed meal and gluten 
meal in the order named. If whole corn is to be sup- 
plemented, either the pea or nut size of ground linseed 
cake or the nut size of cottonseed cake should be used; 
especially in summer are these sizes recommended, 
because there is less waste from high winds. The highest 
grades or best brands of these feeds are advised. Cattle 
feeders are frequently urged to purchase low-grade 
concentrated feeds, the inducement of a lower price 
being the alluring argument that frequently accomplishes 
the end sought. The observation of the writer has been 
that in most instances the purchaser of such grades is 
distinctly the loser. 

AT WHAT STAGE TO FEED 

The question is frequently asked, where these 
concentrated feeds are to be fed only a part of the time, 
at what stage of the fattening process can they be used 
to the best advantage? The commonly accepted prac- 
tice of the best feeders counts for much, and their almost 
universal practice is to use it during the last sixty days 
prior to marketing. This method has much to com- 
mend it, as it improves the appetite at a time when 



66 BEEF PRODUCTION 

it needs quickening, and when it is good practice to 
feed a heavy ration of highly concentrated feeds. It 
gives a finish to the hair and skin that attracts buyers. 
An experiment is needed to determine whether or not 
these same ends would be reached and time saved in the 
fattening by feeding the oil meal or cottonseed meal 
during the first rather than the last part of the feeding 
period; and, again, whether the meal to be fed during 
the last sixty days would not accomplish more if dis- 
tributed in smaller daily rations throughout the whole 
of the feeding period. The writer has observed that 
there is a very marked difference in the way cattle 
getting oil meal and those that do not, go on feed. Those 
getting corn only seem to start much more slowly than 
those getting some nitrogenous concentrates from the 
beginning. 

OATS IN CATTLE FEEDING 

Oats are an excellent food for fattening cattle when 
the price will permit their use, but their feeding value, 
pound for pound, is no higher than that of corn, hence 
they can not be used extensively when higher in price 
per pound than corn. Being rather bulky, they are good 
to mix with cornmeal in the absence of the cob or other 
bulky material. They are not as fattening as corn and 
should be used as a supplement to rather than a substi- 
tute for corn. They make an excellent food for growing 
stock. Oats are valued very highly by a large number 
of cattle feeders to supplement corn in starting calves 
intended for finishing as baby beeves. 

MOLASSES 

Molasses is strictly a carbonaceous food, belonging 
in the same class as corn and similar feeds. It has come 
to be regarded as a valuable feed for fattening cattle, 
especially in the sugar-producing regions of the country 
where it is obtained cheaply as a by-product from the 
manufacture of sugar. In the manufacture of sugar it 
is impossible to get all the sugar to crystallize out of 



MOLASSES 67 

the cane or beet juice, and this sugar, together with 
other organic matter contained mainly in the form of 
proteids, gives the refuse molasses its value as a stock 
food. The protein, however, is in a very small propor- 
tion as compared with the sugar or carbohydrates. 
This refuse is obtainable in the sugar belt for from 
six to ten cents a gallon of about twelve pounds. 

For fattening cattle molasses has as much or more 
value as an appetizer than as an actual food. When 
sprinkled over grain or hay it causes a larger consump- 
tion of feed, and not only this, but feeders claim that it 
is an aid to digestion. Although at present there is 
not much data at hand on the subject, this claim seems 
to be substantiated by experimental evidence. An 
experiment conducted by the Texas Station in 1903 
shows that when molasses at the rate of two-fifths of a 
gallon per steer per day was added to a ration of cotton- 
seed meal and cottonseed hulls, the cattle not only 
made a greater daily gain per head, but the gains were 
made cheaper. (Texas Bulletin 76.) 

A bulletin on the subject has been published by 
Professors John A. Craig and F. R. Marshall of the 
Texas Station, which gives the results of feeding 
molasses to two-year-old steers being finished for mar- 
ket. The average grain ration consisted of 14 pounds 
of cottonseed meal and corn chop, one part of the 
former to two parts of the latter, and the average 
roughage consumed was 12J^ pounds of cottonseed hulls 
per day. To this was added molasses at the rate of a 
little over 3 quarts per steer per day. The cattle thus 
fed made an average daily gain of 1.71 pounds against 
1.27 pounds with a similar lot similarly fed, but without 
the molasses. The cost per pound gain was 10.05 cents 
with the lot receiving molasses against 11.3 cents with 
the lot receiving no molasses. The low rate of gain and 
high cost per pound is due to the fact that the steers 
had been long fed and were nearly fat when the experi- 
ment began. 



68 BEEF PRODUCTION 

The bulletin referred to states that the most common 
method of feeding molasses is to carry it out in buckets 
and mix with the feed in the bunks. In the tests at 
the station the molasses was mixed with an equal 
volume of water and poured over the mixed grains and 
hulls, the whole then being thoroughly stirred. A 
common practice is to take a spraying outfit, the barrel 
being filled with an equal volume of water and molasses, 
and drive through the feed lot, spraying on the mixed 
feed in the bunks such an amount of the mixture as is 
to be fed. According to statements made by the Massa- 
chusetts Station, the residuum molasses from Porto 
Rico is being offered for sale in New England at 13 cents 
a gallon of 12 pounds. The molasses contains 24 to 28 
per cent of water, 3 per cent of nitrogenous matter, 
and 7 to 8 per cent ash, the remainder being sugar and 
allied substances. "It will probably be shown to con- 
tain some 1200 pounds of digestible organic matter in 
a ton, against 1500 pounds in a ton of cornmeal. On 
this basis alone it would have, pound for pound, 80 
per cent of the nutritive value of corn. Its value will 
probably be enhanced over this figure, because of its 
other desirable qualities." 

A good appetizer is made of ground alfalfa hay 
mixed with molasses. Mr. T. B. Hord, Central City, 
Nebraska, claims that such a mixture fed at the rate of 
two pounds per day increased the consumption of corn 
from three to six pounds per day per steer. 

ROUGHAGE IN CATTLE FEEDING 

ALFALFA AND CLOVER HAY COMPARED WITH 
OTHER ROUGHAGE 

It is generally known that alfalfa and clover hay are 
superior roughages for cattle. The writer is inclined to 
believe that the extent of this superiority is not as 
generally appreciated as it should be, else more alfalfa 
and clover and less timothy and other grasses would be 
grown for feeding purposes. The writer has been 



ROUGHAGE FOR CATTLE G9 

unable to find any published data concerning the rela- 
tive value of alfalfa and clover hay when use.d with corn 
for fattening cattle. Cattle feeders who have had ex- 
perience in feeding both are, however, practically 
unanimous in their belief that alfalfa is the better rough- 
age of the two. One factor which materially contributes 
to this fact is that alfalfa contains 11 pounds protein in 
each 100 pounds hay, while red clover contains only 
6.8 pounds. Another fact to be reckoned with is that 
alfalfa is not as much damaged by storms during the 
curing process as is clover. Wheat bran contains but 
12.2 pounds protein per hundredweight and, as far as 
its content of protein goes, is but little more valuable 
for feeding purposes than is alfalfa. Timothy hay con- 
tains 2.8, corn stover 1.7, and oat straw but 1.2 pounds 
protein per hundredweight. Thus it will be seen that 
as far as we are able to judge from the chemical composi- 
tion of these feeds they are not well suited to supple- 
ment corn, which contains 7.8 pounds protein per 
hundredweight. Experience and experiment both cor- 
roborate the chemists' claims. 

TEST MADE AT THE ILLINOIS STATION 

In an experiment at the Illinois Experiment Station, 
some important facts bearing directly upon this subject 
were brought out. Clover hay was compared with 
timothy hay and corn stover when used with corn for 
fattening two-year-old cattle. It took 7.68 pounds corn 
and 4.82 pounds clover hay to produce 1 pound of beef 
in the clover hay fed lot, as compared with 9.87 pounds 
corn and 5.88 pounds timothy hay and corn stover 
combined. Or, taking into consideration the meat 
(both beef and pork) produced, the figures stand as 
follows: 6.75 pounds corn per pound gain on steers and 
pigs combined in the clover hay lot, as against 8.47 
pounds in the timothy hay and corn stover lot. There 
were twelve steers in each lot, and they were fed eighteen 
weeks. In the clover hay lot $272.08 worth of feed 



70 BEEF PRODUCTION 

(figured at normal prices, 35 cents for corn and $8 for 
clover hay)* produced a gain of 3605 pounds (Chicago 
weight) on the steers and 542 pounds on the hogs, while 
in the timothy hay and corn stover lot $251.24 worth 
of feed produced only 2498 pounds gain on steers and 
482 pounds on the hogs. 

The records of this experiment clearly show the rela- 
tively greater efficiency of the corn and clover hay ration 
as compared with the corn, timothy hay, and corn stover 
ration for beef production. That the advantages of the 
former were due entirely to the nature of the roughage 
fed is probable since corn was the concentrate used in 
both instances. Notwithstanding the fact that the 
corn and clover hay ration was more effective for beef 
production, it appeared also to be very favorable to pork 
production, as much more pork was produced by the 
pigs following this lot of steers and more pork per pound 
grain fed to the steers than where timothy hay and corn 
stover made up the roughage part of the ration. 

CLOVER HAY AND CORN MAKE GOOD GAINS 

As would be expected from a comparison of the gains 
made in the two lots, the steers in the lot making the 
largest gains were more nearly finished than the others. 
That is to say, the lot fed on corn and clover hay sold 
for 30 cents per hundredweight more than the lot fed 
on corn, timothy hay, and corn stover. The shrinkage in 
shipping from Champaign to Chicago per steer in the for- 
mer lot was but 35 pounds to the latter's 41. With corn 
at 35 cents per bushel, clover hay at $8 per ton, timothy 
hay at $10, and corn stover at $4, the profit per 
steer in feeding the rations discussed above was for the 
corn and clover hay lot, $11.89; for the corn, timothy 
hay, and corn stover lot, $4.50. This should be sufficient 
argument to encourage the growing of clover or alfalfa 
for cattle feeding purposes. The two-year-old cattle 
used in this test contained considerable Shorthorn blood, 
but would not grade above medium to good and ordi- 



CLOVER HAY AND CORN 71 

narily could be purchased in the fall of the year for 
S3. 80 per hundredweight delivered in the feed lot and 
would sell in the condition in which these were marketed 
at from $5.35 to $5.65 per hundredweight on the 
Chicago market. 

At the Missouri Experiment Station 157.5 bushels 
of corn and 2540 pounds of timothy hay made a gain 
of 789 pounds in 105 days on four steers, or an average 
daily gain of 1.97 pounds. Each bushel of corn in this 
case made a gain of 5 pounds. 

One hundred and seventy-six bushels of corn, 2475 
pounds of clover, and 868 pounds of corn stover made a 
gain of 1140 pounds in the same time, or an average 
daily gain of 2.85 pounds. Here a bushel of corn aver- 
aged to produce 6.74 pounds of gain in weight. 

One hundred and sixty-nine bushels of corn, 2967 
pounds of clover, diid 1139 pounds of wheat straw pro- 
duced a total gain of 1073 pounds, or 2.68 pounds per 
clay. A bushel of corn made with this combination 6.08 
pounds of gain. These results apply with even greater 
force to calves than to yearlings and two-year-old cattle. 
CORN STOVER 

In both composition and digestibility corn stover 
closely resembles timothy hay, and the edible portion 
of the stover has a nutritive value fully equal to that 
of timothy. The Illinois Experiment Station (Bulletin 
58) found the digestion co-efficients for the various 
nutrients in corn stover to be as follows: dry matter, 
58.2 per cent; ash, 22.5 per cent; protein, 37.4 per cent; 
fat, 55.2 per cent; fiber, 70.3 per cent; carbohydrate 
extract, 60.6 per cent. These are averages of results 
obtained from feeding four steers for a period of ten 
days. 

In the system of handling the corn crop practiced 
throughout the corn-belt, namely, that of husking from 
the stalk and using the stalk fields for pasturing cattle 
in the winter, considerable of the feeding value of the 
crop is wasted. 



72 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



Corn stover may be used to the best advantage when 
fed to stock cattle, sheep, or horses. It is not a desir- 
able feed for beef production, especially when fed in 
connection with corn, which is a highly carbonaceous 
ration in itself. It may be advantageously used to 
supplement an inadequate supply of better roughage, 
such as clover or alfalfa hay. 

CHAFFING HAY AND MINGLING WITH GRAIN 

It is held by some cattle feeders that by cutting the 
hay into short lengths and mixing it with the grain, more 
thorough mastication and digestion are secured with 
less liability of digestive derangements and more eco- 
nomical use of feed. Experiments, however, do not 
sustain this theory. At the Illinois Experiment Station 
four lots of choice 1000-lb. feeders of fifteen head in 
each lot were fed six months in a dry feed lot from 
December to June as follows: 

Lot 4, cornmeal, linseed oil meal, gluten meal, and 
clover hay. 

Lot 5, cornmeal, linseed oil meal, gluten meal, and 
chaffed clover hay mingled with the grain. 

Lot 6, corn and cob meal, gluten meal, oil meal, and 
clover hay. 

Lot 7, corn and cob meal, gluten meal, oil meal, and 
chaffed clover hay mingled with the grain. 

The chaffing of the clover hay was done by running 
it through an ensilage cutter. The actual cost of chaff- 
ing was $1.00 per ton, which included labor, and wear 
and depreciation of machinery. The results are sum- 
marized as follows: 



Lot No. 


Total gain 

per steer, 

lb. 


Gain per 

steer per day, 
lb. 


Pork made 

per steer, 

lb. 


Dry matter 

per pound 

gain on 

steers, lb. 


Profit per 
steer 


4 
5 
6 

7 


442.86 
434.14 
432.03 
455.94 


2.38 
2.33 
2.32 
2.45 


20.66 
20.02 
18.00 
24.00 


10.43 
10.71 
11.75 
11.31 


$5.99 
4.50 
4.34 

5.78 



CHAFFING HAY 73 

The feeding of chaffed hay with cornmeal seems 
adverse to large gains as compared with feeding clover 
hay in the ordinary way. In feeding chaffed hay with 
corn and cob meal the effect seems to be favorable to 
the use of chaffed hay for securing rapid gains. These 
differences, however, are so slight that it is safe to say 
that the mere chaffing of the hay and mingling it with 
the grain has but little, if any, influence on securing 
rapid gains. 

The chaffing of hay and mingling it with the con- 
centrates in the form of meals did not add materially 
to their efficiency for beef production, although by this 
system of feeding there is less likelihood of getting the 
steers off feed or of their scouring. 

The Kansas Experiment Station conducted a similar 
experiment, the results of which were not markedly 
favorable to chaffing and mingling, but they were more 
favorable to this practice than were those of the Illinois 
test. 

Professor Henry says in "Feeds and Feeding," that 
in the case of hard-worked horses it is advisable to 
chaff the hay and mix it with the grain and moisten 
the whole mass. This puts it in shape to be quickly 
masticated and swallowed, and has a longer time to 
remain in the stomach for digestion than would be 
possible where long dry hay is fed. But in the case of 
fattening cattle and farm stock in general, which have 
ample time for mastication, there is little or no advan- 
tage in chaffing hay or straw. 

It is quite probable that the chaffing of hay and 
mingling it with the grain in proper proportion is con- 
ducive to a smoother and more attractive finish on the 
cattle. 

FOR GETTING CATTLE ON FEED QUICKLY 

Although there seems to be but slight advantage in 
chaffing hay and mingling it with grain for cattle fed 
for the ordinary fattening period, when the mixed hay 



74 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



and grain ration is fed through the self feeder to cattle 
that are to be fed for a short period only, such cattle 
can be put on full feed much quicker and at a less risk 
than when fed in the ordinary way. This has been 
well illustrated in an experiment conducted at the Illi- 
nois Experiment Station. A number of good to choice 
fleshy three-year-old feeders were selected and divided 
into two lots of fourteen each, and fed for a period of 
89 days. Lot 1 was fed corn meal, oil meal, and clover 
hay by the ordinary method of hand feeding. Lot 2 
was fed on the same feed-stuffs, but the clover hay was 
cut into two-inch lengths and mingled with the grain 
and the mixture was fed through a self feeder, to which 
the cattle had access at all times. The full grain ration 
was reached by gradually increasing the proportion of 
concentrates to roughage. Both lots were given all 
the grain they would consume without causing diges- 
tive disorders and getting them off fed. The entire 
feeding period was divided into six periods of two 
weeks each. The proportion of concentrates to rough- 
age for the different periods is shown by the following 
table : 



Lot 


Periods 


Average 


1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


6 


89 days 


1 
2 


1 : 1.64 
1 : 1.29 


1 :0.67 
1 :0.71 


1:0.72 
1 :0.51 


1:0.55 
1 :0.3S 


1 : 0.43 
1 :0.36 


1 : 0.34 
1 : 0.33 


1:0.61 
1:0.51 



There was quite a marked difference between the 
two lots in the time required to reach full feed, the total 
amount of feed consumed, the proportion of concen- 
trates to roughage, and the rate and cost of gains, the 
difference in every case being in favor of Lot 2. The 
maximum concentrate consumption was reached in the 
fourth period in the case of Lot 2, while with Lot 1 it was 
not reached until the fifth period, showing that Lot 2 
was on full feed about two weeks sooner than Lot 1. 
There was a larger total consumption of feed in Lot 2 



CHAFFING HAY 75 

than in Lot 1, especially of concentrates, the average 
daily grain ration of Lot 1 was 21.97 pounds, against 
24.64 pounds in Lot 2. The average daily consumption 
of roughage was .67 of a pound greater in Lot 1 than in 
Lot 2, but as the digestible nutrients were more expen- 
sive in the form of roughage than in the form of con- 
centrates, it is probable that this larger proportion of 
roughage would work as a handicap in the cost of gains 
for the lot. Lot 2 made larger and more economical 
gains than Lot 1. The average daily gain for Lot 1 was 
2.984 pounds, at a cost of $0.0753 per pound against 
the average daily gain of 3.326 pounds at a cost of 
$0.0749 per pound by Lot 2. The profit per steer in 
Lot 1 was $1,288 and $3,403 in Lot 2. 

These figures show that by chaffing the hay and 
mingling it with the grain and feeding through a self 
feeder, the cattle were put on full feed sooner, consumed 
a larger amount of feed, and made larger and more 
economical gains than when fed in the ordinary way. 
Although such marked results may not be obtained in 
all cases, this experiment was carried on under natural 
conditions and there is no reason why it should show 
results especially favorable to chaffing. 




CHAPTER IX. 

BABY BEEF 

The demand for baby beef is strong and increasing. 
With this increasing demand of our markets for this 
class of beef there is a general movement among cattle 
feeders, and more especially among those who have 
limited experience, toward the feeding of younger cattle. 

, We do not mean by this that 
only the inexperienced are tak- 
ing up the production of baby 
beef. It is but natural that 
i cattle feeders of wide experi- 
ence should be inclined to con- 
tinue to follow those methods which they have found 
profitable and accept slowly new methods and ideas 
of cattle feeding. On the other hand so much has 
been said and written concerning the advantages of 
producing baby beef that the beginner arrives at the 
conclusion that it is the only profitable branch of beef 
production. 

There are many things to be thought of, however, 
before the cattle feeder rushes blindly into the feeding 
of calves and yearlings with a view of finishing them as 
baby beeves. The majority of fat cattle falling within 
this classification are from one to two years of age and 
weigh from 800 to 1100 pounds. Such cattle can 
only be produced from well-bred calves and yearlings. 
Whether or not the finishing of such cattle will prove 
profitable will depend upon a number of conditions, 
chief among which are the breeding and individual 
excellence of the feeding cattle used, their cost, the way 
they are fed, and the condition of the market at the time 
they are sold. 

76 



BABY BEEF 



77 



MUST BE WELL-BRED YOUNGSTERS 

Other things being equal, the younger the cattle the 
longer it will take to mature them for market. Well- 
bred feeding cattle can be matured for market at a 
much younger age than the plainer kinds. One thing 
is certain, baby beef must be made with young cattle. 
Only well-bred ones will mature sufficiently early to 
satisfactorily meet market requirements. It should be 
borne in mind, too, that, provided care has been exer- 




Fig. 7. The right quality with which to produce baby beef. 



cised in the selection of feeding calves or yearlings 
with which to make baby beef, the period of full 
feeding must of necessity be considerably longer than 
with older cattle. 

It is necessary to exercise greater care in the selection 
of feeding cattle intended for ripening into baby beef 
than older cattle for the reasons already stated and for 
the additional reason that the younger an animal is 
and the more milk fat it possesses, the less it shows 
its lack of quality or breeding. By the time a steer is 
two years old one can tell quite accurately how such 
steers will feed out. It is a much more hazardous propo- 



78 BEEF PRODUCTION 

sition with the calf. We have fed calves that were 
selected with the greatest care as to breeding, age, and 
uniformity and still found that they lacked much in 
uniformity at the finish. 

In a general way it may be said that to fatten young 
animals profitably they must be good, they must be full 
fed for a considerable time, and they must be made fat. 
This means that "tops 7 ' must be bought or bred. 
Those who have had experience know that as soon as 
the cattle feeder goes to "topping" droves of cattle he 
operates at a disadvantage. A premium is usually 
demanded for this grade. The cattle feeder should 
know what he can afford to pay and not give too much 
heed to the oft-repeated statement that good calves 
cannot be bought too high. One way of becoming 
thoroughly convinced that this is not true is to try it. 

SPREAD IN PRICES NARROWER 

The original weight of the calf is small, hence in the 
production of baby beef the cattle feeder cannot depend 
for his profit upon the advance in value per hundred 
weight upon the original weight. In any event the 
spread between the buying and selling price of calves 
is not as great as with older cattle. We have known of 
a number of instances in which calves were purchased 
by the head and sold fat by the hundredweight where 
the selling price was no greater than the buying price 
per hundredweight. If any considerable profit is 
made in such instances it must necessarily be due to 
exceedingly cheap gains. The possibility of securing 
cheaper gains on young cattle than on older ones is an 
established fact, yet the writer has strong reasons for 
believing that this difference has been greatly ex- 
aggerated. 

Profitable baby beef production requires experience, 
judgment, and skill of a high order. It is a mistake for 
the inexperienced to dip heavily into this enterprise. 

The most successful operators try to avoid losing 



BABY BEEF 



79 



the calf or milk fat or bloom of the young calf. This 
is not an easy thing to do. Usually considerable shrink- 
age occurs, especially where calves have not been ac- 
customed to eating grain before being weaned. Where 
considerable shrinkage in condition occurs it is difficult 
and expensive to regain, not only so, but it materially 
lengthens the time required to mature them. The 
calf will not profitably consume so much rough feed as 
older cattle. Experienced cattle feeders understand 




Fig. 8. High class 



baby beef" bred and fed by D. R. Perry 
& Son, Sanford, 111. 



that the older the steer the coarser and commoner the 
feed that can be given him. The older steer may be 
purchased in thin flesh and yet matured in six months 
of feeding; the calf or yearling not so. The calf should 
be in good condition when purchased and should be so 
fed as to keep him gaining until finished for the market. 

ROUGHAGE INCREASES FEEDING CAPACITY 

At the beginning the calf should be encouraged to 
consume considerable quantities of roughage. This 
will have a tendency to increase the capacity of the calf 



80 BEEF PRODUCTION 

for handling large quantities of more concentrated feeds 
later on. It is assumed that calves require and will be 
provided with desirable roughage such as clover, or 
alfalfa hay, or silage during the winter months and 
abundant pasture during the summer. Calves should 
be fed corn together with some nitrogenous concentrate 
like oil meal or cottonseed meal during the winter. 
Corn may be fed to calves in the form of shelled corn, 
crushed corn, or sliced. With plenty of hogs to follow, 



Fig. 8A. Baby beeves possessing desirable quality and finish. 
Fed by Hon. Humphrey Janes, Washington Court House, Ohio. 



the writer believes that these forms will be found more 
profitable than cornmeal or corn and cob meal. If 
oats are cheap and more readily available than oil meal 
or cottonseed meal they may be substituted. Oats are 
one of the very best of feeds with which to start calves, 
and with cottonseed and linseed meals at almost prohibi- 
tive prices, they, with alfalfa or clover hay as roughage, 
are likely to prove the best supplement to corn for full 
feeding. When turned to grass the grain ration may 
in some instances be gradually decreased as the grass 
improves. Whether or not the feeding of grain should 
be altogether dispensed with for a short time while the 
calves are on grass will depend upon the grass and upon 



BABY BEEF 81 

the time at the disposal of the cattle feeder for finishing 
them. Ordinarily the grain ration should not be 
entirely discontinued, no matter how good the grass. 
It can be slightly reduced for a few weeks and then as 
the grass begins to fail it should be increased until the 
calves are getting all they will take. 

LIBERAL FEEDING IS NECESSARY 

The tendency with calves and yearlings is to grow 
rather than fatten. The aim of the cattle feeder produc- 
ing baby beef should be to have them fatten as they 
grow. This can only be accomplished by liberal feeding. 
The most common mistake among baby beef producers 
is to market before fat enough. It is extremely difficult 
to get calves and yearlings too fat for market require- 
ments. If heifer calves are fed instead of steers they 
will mature more quickly and should be marketed earlier. 
Ordinarily the younger prime heifers are at the time of 
marketing, the less discrimination in price there will be 
between them and steers. 

We advise vaccination to prevent blackleg, and if 
calves have not been vac- 
cinated before purchase they 
should be as soon after as 
possible. Good vaccine and 
intelligent use are practically 
a specific preventive of black- 
leg. 

It is seldom practicable to get spring calves ready 
for baby beef market before July of the second 
summer. More frequently they are not marketed 
until October, November, or December, when they are 
approximately eighteen months of age. 




CHAPTER X. 

SELECTING CATTLE FOR, AND THE POSSI- 
BILITIES OF, THE SHORT FEED 

Undoubtedly the system of feeding cattle a relatively 
short time, making it possible to handle several different 
droves a year is becoming more popular. In addition 
to the advantage of being able to handle more droves 
each year is the possibility of avoiding the long and 
necessarily expensive fattening periods. On the other 
hand the disadvantages of such a system are not want- 
ing, chief among which are the impossibility of 
making finished beeves of a high grade, the difficulty 
of securing suitable stock, and a growing and marked 
tendency among buyers to strongly discriminate against 
short-fed cattle. In reality there are two kinds of short 
feeds, viz., (a) buying noticeably thin fleshed cattle 
with considerable age, shipping them to the country, and 
returning them to market in about ninety days after 
liberal grain feeding. This is a practice commonly 
spoken of as " warming up." This system deals very 
largely with cattle of low grade or those plain in quality. 
(b) The purchase of fleshy cattle of strong weights that 
have been shipped to market, for one reason or another 
in a half fat condition. Cattle that are good enough 
so that packers buy them for slaughtering purposes, 
not bidding them high, as they are not fat enough to suit 
the trade demanding choice beef for which those demand- 
ing it are willing to pay top prices. Those who have 
made the greatest success of this method of feeding 
have had unusual facilities for buying and marketing. 
Skilled feeding is necessarily an important feature of 
the business, but after all is said, the success of the enter- 
prise must rest largely in judicious and timely buy- 

82 



THE SHORT FEED 83 

ing and marketing. Cattle feeders who do not have 
these advantages would better leave this branch of the 
business to those who have. 

Commonly, about one-third of the margin per hun- 
dredweight necessary to balance accounts in case of 
feeding cattle bought on the market and returned to be 
sold there after fattening, is due to freights, commissions, 
and stock yards charges. Hence the shorter the fatten- 
ing period, the larger is the relative importance of these 
buying and marketing expenses. Thus it is not diffi- 
cult to see that the difference in distance from the mar- 
ket, causing differences in freight rates, may properly 
affect the nature of cattle feeding practice advisable. 
It should be obvious that nearness to market should be 
favorable to a system of short feeding. Perhaps the 
factor of greatest importance in selecting cattle for this 
purpose, assuming whatever purchased to be worth the 
price paid, is to get cattle that have as much age as 
possible. Cattle under two years old should seldom if 
ever be selected for short feeding purposes, and three- 
year-olds are to be preferred to younger cattle. If the 
cattle are purchased with a view of "warming them up," 
a decided lack of flesh, providing they are thrifty, is to 
be desired, while if purchased with a view of making 
a good to choice grade of beef, fleshy feeders or cattle 
that some other feeder has "warmed up" should be 
purchased. In both instances, but more especially in 
the latter, as good quality or breeding in the steers 
should be secured as is available at right prices. Weight, 
always an important factor in buying feeding cattle, is 
especially important in buying cattle for a short feed. 

HOW TO FEED 

No matter what method of getting cattle on feed is 
advisable where cattle are to be fed for a considerable 
time, for short feeds they must be put on feed quickly 
and fed on a heavy, highly concentrated ration. Else- 
where it has been stated that the safest and most satis- 



84 BEEF PRODUCTION 

factory method of getting cattle on feed quickly is to 
chaff the hay and mingle it with the grain. This is not 
always practicable, but where at all possible it is to be 
advised. 

POSSIBILITIES OF THE SHORT FEED 

The possibilities of the short feed have been demon- 
strated by an experiment conducted at the Illinois 
Experiment Station. Thirty-four good to choice fleshy 
three-year-old steers were purchased on the Chicago 
market August 22 and taken to the University of Illi- 
nois, where they were fed until November 25, a period 
of eighty-nine days. On the basis of weights taken 
after their arrival at Champaign after being shipped 
from and before being shipped back to Chicago, the 
steers made an average daily gain of 3.15 pounds for 
the eighty-nine days. The average feed per steer per day 
was: corn meal, 20.28 pounds; oil meal, 3.02 pounds; 
and clover hay 13.11 pounds. 

The steers cost $4.25 per hundredweight on the Chi- 
cago market, and, taking into consideration the freight 
to Champaign, shrink, commission, and feed, the cost in 
the feed lot at the beginning of the experiment was 
$4.45 per hundredweight. The financial result of the 
experiment is shown by the following statement : 

Disbursements 

To Cattle: 
34 steers, 36,490 lb. at $4 . 25 per cwt . $1550 . 82 

Commission 20 . 00 

Freight 41.88 

Feed prior to experiment 4 . 00 

$1616.70 

To Feed: 

30 . 698 tons cornmeal at $13 . 699. . . . $420 . 53 

4 . 589 tons oil meal at $28 . 00 128 . 50 

10 . 175 tons clover hay at $8 . 00 ... . 81 . 40 
9.661 tons clover hay chopped at 

$9.00 86.95 

717.38 



THE SHORT FEED 85 

To Marketing: 
Freight Champaign to Chicago, com- 
mission, feed, and yardage 76 . 88 

Total expenditures . ... ... $2410.96 

Receipts 
34 steers, 44,650 lb. at $5 . 60 per cwt.$2500 . 40 
465 lb. pork at $5.00 per cwt 23.25 

Total receipts. $2523.65 

Profit on 34 steers 112.69 

This shows a profit of $112.69 with corn at 30 cents 
per bushel and other food-stuffs as charged in the 
account. No account was taken of labor and interest 
on money invested, or fertility produced. 



CHAPTER XT. 

MAKING CHRISTMAS BEEF 

The fattening of cattle with especial reference to 
their fitness for Christmas market requirements has 
become a speciality among quite a large number of 
cattle feeders. While the demand for Christmas beef 
is limited it has thus far been sufficiently extensive to 
absorb the supply offered and that at good prices. The 
prices paid in the leading markets fcr prime Christmas 
beef look attractive to the average beef producer who 
is not very closely in touch with market conditions. 
These prices frequently tempt men to feed cattle for 
this particular market that are not at all suited for the 
trade. The good prices are only paid for the prime 
cattle and to make prime cattle requires careful atten- 
tion to every detail of the enterprise, including the selec- 
tion of the feeding cattle to be finished and the fattening 
of them. It requires skill of a high order to produce 
cattle that are good enough in quality and condition to 
attract buyers during the holiday season. The produc- 
tion of such cattle is by no means an easy or sure way 
to secure profits in the cattle feeding business. It 
requires choice to fancy quality in feeding cattle to begin 
with, and it is but seldom that such cattle can be pur- 
chased except at a premium. Then, frequently, it is 
desirable in order to secure the highest finish to feed 
some nitrogenous commercial feeds which are relatively 
high priced, and lastly, in order to secure the high finish 
demanded requires an extended feeding period. The 
experienced cattle feeder recognizes at once that the 
factors enumerated above each increase materially the 
cost of production. This increased cost amounts to 
considerable when all these factors are combined. 



CHRISTMAS BEEF 87 

The so-called Christmas market for such cattle is 
made by three classes of buyers. Buyers for local 
slaughter, as, for example, in the Chicago market the 
packers; order buyers for shipment to other cities; 
and exporters. The proper time to market Christmas 
cattle is from about November 23 to December 15. 
Between these elates buyers for local slaughter, shipment, 
and export are on the market until their orders are filled. 
Exporters who buy for the foreign holiday trade usually 




Fig. 9. Prime standing rib of Christmas quality. 

buy most of their cattle from November 25 to 27, al- 
though these elates may vary a little one way or the other, 
depending upon the days of the week on which export 
boats sail for foreign ports. Ordinarily, exporters 
take from one-fourth to one-third of the. total supply of 
Christmas cattle offered on the Chicago market. The 
larger proportion of holiday beef is exported alive, and 
for this purpose cattle possessing fancy quality and 
thick fat, weighing from 1300 to 1500 pounds are 
wanted. From 1300 to 1400 pounds is the popular 
weight, although they use some prime 1100 to 1200 
pound cattle for that trade and a few weighing as much 



88 BEEF PRODUCTION 

as 1600 pounds. For the New York and Eastern holi- 
day trade, the first ten days of December, especially 
from the fifth to the eighth, is considered a favorable 
time to market; for the Chicago city trade and nearby 
cities and towns, from December 10 to 15. 

New York, Boston, and some other Eastern cities use 
more heavy good weight cattle than the Western cities. 
They also use a good proportion of yearlings and light 
weights, and the light and medium weight prime cattle 




Fig. 10. A high-class porterhouse steak. An expensive cut, 

but good 

seem to be getting more popular every year. It has been 
intimated that the supply is not as large as it would be 
if it were not a difficult matter to produce prime Christ- 
mas bullocks. The accompanying illustrations will 
give the reader an idea of the quality or grade demanded 
by discriminating buyers of Christmas beef, the grade 
of cattle which produce it, and lastly the kind of feeding 
cattle it is necessary to select if one expects to achieve 
success in the production of Christmas beef. 

Figure 9 shows a standing rib (from which are cut 
prime of rib roasts). Here the distribution of fat and 
lean is ideal, showing sufficient richness without much 
waste. Figure 10, the porterhouse steak, is at best an 
expensive cut, but where the fat is as abundant as 



CHRISTMAS BEEF 



89 




o 

o 
a 

2 
0. 



a 

It 






fafi 



90 BEEF PRODUCTION 

shown here it is extremely so, although it is a high class 
sample of a Christmas porterhouse steak. 

The prime steers which are slaughtered to supply 
the demand for this grade of beef are invariably well 
bred. No dairy-bred or scrub steer need apply. They 
will receive no consideration. By "well bred" we mean 
steers which contain a high percentage of the blood of 
some of the improved beef breeds like the Aberdeen- An- 
gus, Shorthorn, Hereford, Galloway, or Polled Durham. 
Nor is the possession of beef blood in abundance a pass- 
port to this exclusive class Beef blood in abundance 
they must have, but it must be accompanied with the 
characteristics associated with highest excellence of 
such grades. 

Figure 11 illustrates the quality and the individual 
excellence necessary in feeding cattle suitable for the 
production of Christmas beef. With quality similar to 
this to start with and thorough familiarity of the cattle 
feeding problem, the farmer is equipped with the 
essentials for producing Christmas beef. Whether 
or not such production will result in profit will depend 
upon the cost of the feeding cattle and feeds used, 
the skill of the feeder, and the state of the market at 
the time they go forward to market. It should be em- 
phasized that the making of Christmas cattle is a costly 
business and not at all well calculated to yield large 
profits if indeed any at all to the novice. It is a busi- 
ness that is hazardous at best and a goodly portion of 
those who follow it do so from a spirit of rivalry or pride. 
Those who make it pay are experienced cattle feeders of 
long standing. 

Figure 12 shows satisfactory prime quality and con- 
dition in cattle for the Christmas market. 



CHRISTMAS BEEF 



91 







xi 
O 

O <3 
O 



bfi 



CHAPTER XII. 

CARE OF CATTLE ON FEED 

The care of cattle on feed is an important factor. 
By care we refer to a number of little details which are 
not ordinarily included in discussing methods of feeding, 
rations, or equipment. These include among other 
things, regularity in feeding, quietness, number of times 
a day to feed, the number of cattle to be fed together, 
and salting. In feeding it should be remembered that 
fattening cattle soon become accustomed to looking for 
their feed at certain hours in the day, and if it is not 
supplied at the regular time the cattle become uneasy 
and worry. It is unnecessary to say that this cause 
for worry among cattle should be avoided. As soon as 
the fattening process begins, the cattle should be fed at 
certain hours and in the same way. This time cannot 
be varied fifteen minutes without some detriment to 
the cattle. The extent of injury will depend upon the 
frequency and extent of irregularities. 

IMPORTANCE OF QUIETNESS 

The quietness of manner of the feeder is also an im- 
portant consideration. The even-tempered attendant 
who is quiet in manner and movement invariably proves 
more satisfactory than the erratic, bustling, noisy one. 
The cattle soon learn to have confidence in the former 
and welcome his coming among them, while they are 
always suspicious of the latter, never feeling quite at 
ease when he is in sight. Under the management of 
the former, the cattle become tame and quiet, even 
though more or less wild at the outset; while under the 
latter, wild cattle become wilder and tame cattle become 
timid. The writer has observed a wide difference in 

92 



CARE OF CATTLE 93 

practice among feeders as to their manner of approach- 
ing fattening steers. Some are brusque in manner, rush- 
ing up to the steers and scaring them up quickly, while 
other (and I am bound to say more successful) feeders 
approach the cattle with the greatest care and consid- 
eration, getting the cattle up, if at all, as quietly as pos- 
sible. Pastures for cattle in quiet, secluded places are 
more valuable for fattening cattle than are those adja- 
cent to public roads or adjoining pastures where horses 
or breeding cattle run. 

A FLY PREVENTIVE 

Flies are a great drawback to successful summer 
feeding. Fattening cattle may be partially protected 
from them by furnishing the cattle with a cool, dark 
shed to run in during the heat of the day, the doorway 
to which is provided with strips of burlap hung at the 
top of the doorway and extending low enough to strike 
the backs of the cattle as they pass into the shed. The 
painting of these sheds white is recommended by some 
practical feeders as one means of making them more 
cool than they would be were the exterior painted red, 
or some other dark color, or not painted at all. 

GROOMING 

Grooming of fattening cattle is a practice of doubtful 
advisability. It has been practiced only to a limited 
extent, and then usually with show cattle. To the 
writer's knowledge, some cattle feeders advocate and 
practice, with apparently good results, the tacking up 
of grooming cards in convenient places about the feed 
lot where the cattle perform their own grooming in a 
more or less crude fashion. It is only necessary for the 
cattle feeder to tack up a few of these cards to become 
convinced that the cattle will use and enjoy them. 

NUMBER OF TIMES A DAY TO FEED 

The majority of cattle feeders prefer feeding their 
cattle grain and roughage twice a clay in winter and 



94 BEEF PRODUCTION 

grain once a day in summer. Feeding once a day in 
summer is practiced largely as a matter of convenience 
and not because it is believed to be better for the cattle. 
For the most part the same reasons that make it desir- 
able to feed grain twice a day in winter apply in summer 
with equal force. 

NUMBER OF CATTLE TOGETHER 

As to the number of cattle that should be run together 
in the same feed lot, it may be said that the common 
practice is to run them in droves of approximately 100, 
where large numbers are fed. There is no doubt, how- 
ever, that except for convenience in caring for the cattle, 
smaller droves would be advisable. If the rule were 
made not to feed over fifty in a lot, it would be a good 
one, and then see that each lot of fifty is carefully as- 
sorted as to age, grade, and weight. 

SALTING OF FATTENING CATTLE 

There are those who claim that the salting of cattle 
is not only unnecessary, but positively detrimental to 
fattening cattle. Such claims are based upon evidence 
that is scarcely conclusive enough to warrant the aban- 
donment of the use of salt in cattle feeding until the 
matter has received most careful confirmation by experi- 
mental demonstration. The writer believes, with the 
majority of cattle feeders, that salt is desirable and a 
helpful aid to appetite and digestion. It may be fed in 
small quantities at regular intervals, or provided in boxes 
to which the cattle have access at all times. We prefer 
the latter method, as it at once disposes of the question 
of the proper amount to feed. If the cattle can help 
themselves at will, and are never permitted to be with- 
out it, they will seldom take too much. We have used 
rock salt with satisfactory results, both for winter and 
summer feeding, but prefer the loose salt, especially for 
winter use, and advise placing the salt boxes under cover 
where at all possible. 



DEHORNING 95 

A CONDITION POWDER 

It frequently happens that an occasional steer or 
heifer gets out of condition and needs something in the 
nature of a tonic to tone up the system. The following 
has been found useful in such instances : 
Mix thoroughly 

4 lbs. sulphate of iron, 
4 lbs. sulphur, 
2 lbs. phosphate of lime, 
2 lbs. pulverized anise. 
Dose: One tablespoonful in a small bran mash 
twice daily. 

DEHORNING STOCKERS AND FEEDERS — 
HOW AND WHY 

The advantages of hornless stockers and feeders are 
obvious and are coming to be more and more recognized 
by breeders and feeders, as well as by buyers of cattle 
for slaughter. The advantages from the feeder's stand- 
point are economy of space in the feed lot and also in 
shipping, and possibly a higher price for the finished 
product. 

Hornless cattle require much less room in the sheds 
and feed lots than those bearing horns, and there is no 
danger from goring each other with the horns. There 
is also a saving of room at the feed racks, as hornless 
cattle will crowd around a feed rack as close as they 
can stand, while those with horns require much more 
space, and even then there is danger of injury due to 
crowding for the feed. There is an economy when it 
comes to shipping, as more hornless cattle can be put 
into a car than can those bearing horns. 

In a lot of feeders there are always a few timid ones, 
and these are driven around and kept away from the 
feed by the stronger ones, and, as a consequence, these 
animals make small gains. With hornless cattle much 
of this trouble is avoided. 

Other things being equal, the buyer or butcher has 



96 BEEF PRODUCTION 

a preference for hornless cattle. Horned cattle always 
bruise each other more or less and when they are shipped 
long distances this bruising may be done to such an 
extent as to quite materially affect their selling price. 
Bruises on an animal usually show on the dressed car- 
cass and detract somewhat from its value, and every 
puncture in the hide caused by a horn makes it less val- 
uable for tanning. The shrinkage in weight during 
shipment is less with hornless than with horned cattle, 
as they are quieter. Hornless cattle are especially pre- 
ferred for Eastern shipment and for export, but quite 
often even local butchers make a discrimination in their 
favor. 

Since hornless cattle are more valuable to the buyer 
and butcher, they should command a higher price for 
the feeder. However, the difference in the price paid 
is usually not large. The claim is sometimes made that 
the presence of horns on an animal means a reduction of 
fifty cents per hundredweight in the market price, but 
this statement is overdrawn. A difference of ten to 
twenty-five cents per hundredweight is frequently made. 
This is especially true with cattle common in quality. 

METHODS OF DEHORNING 

The two methods of dehorning, usually practiced 
are, (1) the removal of the horns after they have reached 
their growth, by means of a saw or clippers, and (2) the 
prevention of the growth of the horn while the animal 
is yet young, by the application of a chemical. 

In the early history of dehorning the instrument 
commonly used was a sharp saw, quite often a common 
hand saw. The animal was placed in a strong stanchion, 
a halter placed on the head and the nose drawn up. 
With the head of the animal in this position the horns 
could be quickly removed. The operation caused more 
or less excitement to the animal, and a great deal of 
pain. About 1890, clippers made especially for the 
purpose began to gradually replace the saw. By this 



DEHORNING 97 

method the animal need not be secured except to be 
tied to a post with a strong halter. The clippers first 
used crushed the horn-core, leaving a wound that took 
a long time to heal, but with the modern clippers this 
crushing is largely done away with. 

There is very little choice between the use of the 
saw and clippers in regard to the quality of the work 
done. The use of the saw requires a longer time and 
causes greater pain. By the use of the clippers the 
operation is done much more quickly and is all over 
with before the animal has a chance to struggle. When 
the clippers are used the blood vessels supplying the 
horn are cut off smoother than with the saw, conse- 
quently bleeding does not stop as quickly. Where 
either the saw or clippers are used it is necessary to get 
one-eighth to one-fourth of an inch below the point 
where the horn and skin grow together to prevent 
further growth. Unless this precaution is taken, the 
horn is likely to continue to grow, giving an unsightly 
appearance to the head. 

The operation should not be performed either during 
fly time or cold weather, the best time being in the fall 
after the flies have gone and before cold weather sets in. 
When the horn is cut off" the frontal sinus is opened, 
and during cold weather the air drawn in at each in- 
spiration is likely to cause catarrh and give rise to serious 
trouble. If done in fly time the cavity frequently 
becomes fly-blown and filled with maggots, which pre- 
vents its healing and causes great agony to the animal. 
The operation should be performed on a pleasant day 
when the animals can be turned out after the work of 
dehorning is completed. It is well to have on hand 
some bandages, pine tar, and absorbents to check the 
flow of blood. 

The easiest, cheapest, most successful, and least pain- 
ful method of dehorning is by the application of a 
caustic while the animals are young. Although this 
causes some pain, 'it is merely a burning sensation which 



98 BEEF PRODUCTION 

does not last more than an hour at the outside, causes 
no nervous shock, and there is every reason to believe 
that it is much less than the pain caused by the use 
of the saw or clippers. By the use of this method there 
is no set-back to the animal, as the calves never miss a 
feed and there is no danger of the loss of a single animal. 
Another advantage of this method is that it leaves a 
much neater head than when the horns are taken off 
after they reach their growth, leaving the head resem- 
bling a natural poll rather than with a square top. 

The substance used is caustic potash or caustic soda 
which comes in sticks about the size of a lead pencil, 
and can be procured at almost any drug store. When 
not in use the sticks should be kept in a closely stop- 
pered bottle, as they will absorb water from the air and 
go into solution. It is claimed that this method is 
successful after the horn is an inch or more in length, 
but the best time to apply it is after the calf is about 
a week or two old, or just as soon as the button or young 
horn can be felt with the finger. The best method of 
application is to clip the hair from around the young 
horn with a pair of scissors, wet the stick of caustic 
potash (not with the tongue), and rub it vigorously on 
the skin over the horn. This requires but a few minutes 
and can be done by one man. A brown scab will form 
which will come off in about a month or six weeks, 
leaving a smooth, clean poll. To protect the hand, the 
stick of caustic should be wrapped with paper, leaving 
one end exposed. Do not get it too wet or it will run 
down over the side of the head, making a needless sore, 
and may get into the eye. In making the application, 
rub in thoroughly, as many failures have been caused 
by insufficient rubbing. 

Since this method has come into general use, a num- 
ber of patent dehorners have appeared on the market. 
These are nothing more than saturated solutions of 
caustic soda or potash and are sold at many times the 
price at which it can be purchased in sticks at the drug 



DEHORNING 99 

store, and are no more and often not nearly so effective 
as the stick form. The cost of the stick form is so 
small as to render the cost almost inappreciable. Where 
large numbers of cattle are to be dehorned the cheapest 
method is undoubtedly the use of the clippers and they 
may be advantageously used at any time after the horn 
is well started. There are some dehorning clippers, too, 
especially designed for young calves. Dehorning while 
the animal is still young is to be encouraged. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

LENGTH OF THE FEEDING PERIOD 

WHAT SHOULD BE THE LENGTH OF THE FEEDING 
PERIOD ? 

If this question were to be put to sheep and lamb 
feeders there would be but little difference of opinion. 
Experienced mutton producers look upon ten to fourteen 
weeks as about the proper length of time to feed. Horse 
feeders think one hundred days a desirable period for 
fattening heavy horses for market. The length of the 
cattle fattening period is extremely variable, ranging 
from ninety days to twelve months, and either of these 
periods or any time between these limits, may be con- 
sidered good practice under certain conditions. If, for 
example, six to eight months old calves were purchased 
with a view of exhibiting at a fat stock show a year 
hence, it would be necessary to get the calves on full 
feed as quickly as it would be safe, and continue full 
feeding up to show time. In case of "warmed up" or 
fleshy feeders possessing considerable age they can be 
put in marketable form in from ninety to one hundred 
and twenty clays. 

FACTORS AFFECTING LENGTH OF FATTENING PERIOD 

The principal factors affecting the length of the feed- 
ing period are, method of feeding, grade, condition, and 
age of feeding cattle used. 

Method of Feeding: Where it is desired to feed a 
large proportion of roughage to grain to feeding cattle, 
the fattening process is slow. On the other hand the 
feeding of large proportions of grain to roughage, or, in 
other words, the feeding of a highly concentrated ration 
usually shortens the fattening period. Forced feeding 

100 



FATTENING PERIOD 101 

on highly concentrated rations required for quick finish 
is, of course, more hazardous than the longer feeding 
period with the more bulky ration. A compromise be- 
tween the two somewhat radical methods has been 
practiced with excellent results. This compromise 
method is as follows: For winter fattening 1000- 
lb. feeders in a six-months' period, use thirty to sixty 
days for getting cattle to full grain ration, allowing 
free access to all the roughage the cattle will take at 
the beginning and gradually decreasing the amount of 
roughage as the grain is increased. With two and 
three-year-old cattle that are finished on grass, 120 
days of full feeding are usually sufficient to put such 
cattle in satisfactory marketable condition after they 
have been carried sixty to ninety clays on light grain 
rations. 

Grade and condition of feeding cattle used: The 
quality or breeding of the cattle has a direct bearing 
upon the proper length of the fattening period. 
Common cattle of the lower grades and plainer sorts 
are not susceptible to the same high finish that can be 
given well-bred cattle, hence it is useless to feed them 
for it. Low grade feeders finish quicker than those of 
high grade at same weights and in same condition, 
because they are older. 

Age of feeding cattle used: In ordinary practice it 
takes three to four months to finish mature feeders; 
five to seven months, two-year-olds ; eight to ten months 
for yearlings, and ten to eighteen months for calves. 



CHAPTER XIV. 

FEEDING CATTLE FOR THE HOME MARKET 

Feeding cattle for the home market might be com- 
pared in some ways with breeding horses with a view 
of producing horses which are best adapted for farm 
work. It is a relatively easy matter to satisfy the farm 
horse market as well as the local meat market require- 
ments for fat cattle. It is not so easy to produce, at a 
profit, farm horses for the farmer's use or fat cattle for 
the local butcher. The main reason is that the horses 
classed as farm horses and the butcher cattle are abun- 
dant and not of the better grades, hence they are usually 
low-priced. The farmer does not believe that it is a 
business proposition for him to pay long prices for horses 
to be used by poor teamsters for farm work. The local 
butchers in small cities know that they can not charge 
for their cuts of meat what would be necessary to secure 
a profit if they were to buy the best grades of cattle. 

The most popular cattle for the local butcher are 
fairly well fattened young heifers, weighing from 700 to 
1000 pounds. These can be purchased cheaper than 
steers and make very satisfactory beef. The supply of 
such heifers is not sufficient to meet the demands of the 
class of trade that uses them, but this does not mean 
that the short supply will cause materially higher prices, 
as .the local butcher has established a very narrow range 
of prices. If the supply of heifers becomes inadequate 
or their price too high he buys cows or plain steers. 

The cattle feeder, therefore, who plans to feed cattle 
for the local market and make any profit must expect 
to handle heifers, young cows, and a low grade of steers. 
These must be purchased as feeders at low prices, fat- 
tened as economically as possible, and sold before they 

X02 



HOME MARKET 103 

reach a degree of fatness beyond that desired by the 
local dealer in fresh meats. That is to say, the local 
butcher who supplies the trade in small cities, and, for 
that matter, the bulk of the trade in large cities, cannot 
handle to advantage cattle that have been fattened to 
a high finish. Such cattle carry too much waste fat. Of 
course, no consumer, rich or poor, wishes to pay for 
waste fat. On the other hand but relatively few under- 
stand that the highest quality of beef is impossible with- 
out considerable quantities of waste fat. The wealthy 
consumer demands a choice grade of beef. To get it he 
is obliged to pay for some waste fat, which is sometimes 
delivered, but more often remains at the market. 

Selling cattle to the local butcher is most often 
resorted to with a few odd cattle by large cattle feeders 
who wish to cull them before shipment, or by small cattle 
feeders who have but a few to sell. When we observe, 
however, that according to the best figures obtainable, 
nearly one-half the cattle slaughtered in the country 
are slaughtered by local butchers or at small markets, 
the importance of this branch of the industry is evident. 
(Garfield Report.) 



CHAPTER XV. 

KIND AND CARE OF PASTURES FOR BEEF 
PRODUCTION 

There are two general systems in vogue for furnish- 
ing pasture for cattle — (a) permanent pastures and (b) 
pastures used in a rotation. 

PERMANENT PASTURES 

There are some decided advantages in using a system 
of permanent pastures for cattle. It simplifies the mat- 
ter of fences, water supply, shade, and feed bunks. 
It does away with the expense of reseeding. Another 
advantage is that such a pasture properly managed. is 
never a complete failure. It may be short on account 
of adverse climatic conditions, but it may always be 
relied upon to furnish some pasture. Again, the per- 
manent pasture properly managed may be profitably 
used in prolonging the pasturing season. Undoubtedly 
these advantages have largely contributed in making 
bluegrass the favorite kind of pasture among cattle 
feeders in the corn-belt. Of the replies received in 
answer to questions sent out by the Illinois Experiment 
Station to a large number of cattle feeders, 55 per cent 
use bluegrass, 25 per cent timothy, 15 per cent clover, 
and 5 per cent some one or more of the following: 
Red-top, rye, cow-peas, and orchard grass. 

PASTURE IN ROTATION 

It is undoubtedly true that there are fewer bluegrass 
pastures in sections of the country where cattle feeding 
is a leading industry, than there were formerly, their 
place being taken either by a continuous crop-growing 
system or pasture in rotation. There are some ad- 
ieu 



CARE OF PASTURES 105 

vantages in this system. It gives a much better oppor- 
tunity to evenly distribute on all parts of the farm the 
fertilizer produced by the cattle. Some have abandoned 
permanent bluegrass pastures, substituting in their 
stead pastures of mixed grasses in rotation, believing 
that by the latter method more grass is produced and the 
general interests of the farm better subserved. For 
example, in "Practical Farming and Gardening," David 
Rankin of Missouri, known everywhere among cattle- 




A shed in the pasture for shade where there are no trees. 

men, states unqualifiedly that he has abandoned the 
permanent bluegrass pastures for pastures of clover and 
timothy in rotation. 

Whether a man should choose one system or the 
other will depend upon the location of the farm and 
whether or not portions of it are unsuited for growing 
crops and are well adapted for permanent pastures. 
Where on such locations a bluegrass sod can be secured 
and maintained perhaps no other excels it for general 
cattle feeding purposes. With proper attention such 
pastures improve with age. Timothy is not as rich in 
nutrients. The clovers and alfalfa pastures are admira- 
bly adapted to cattle feeding, except the tendency 
they possess for causing bloat, which must be carefully 



106 BEEF PRODUCTION 

guarded against. In case of alfalfa this factor is suffi- 
ciently important to render its general use for pasture 
questionable. No comprehensive experimental work 
has been conducted relative to the comparative values 
of different kinds of pastures for grazing or fattening 
cattle. In the absence of such data we can only say 
that from the cattle feeder's standpoint the best pasture 
for a particular locality and type of soil is that which will 
produce the largest average yield of beef per acre. The 
extent to which summer and winter feeding are prac- 
ticed has a bearing on this subject as well as the kind of 
cattle handled and the labor available. 

MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 

There is a number of considerations in connection 
with the care and management of pastures that should 
receive careful attention. Many pastures that are now 
supporting but one animal to two acres might be made 
to support twice the number with judicious management 
along the following lines : First be persistent in securing 
a good stand. The writer has traveled over many pas- 
tures that do not possess more than half a stand of 
grass, and it is obvious that such pastures cannot pro- 
duce a maximum yield. Second, keep down noxious 
weeds. Weeds seldom exterminate themselves, but 
subsequently spread so rapidly that they take possession 
of the land to the exclusion of useful plants. Pastures 
should be gone over once or twice a year to remove weeds, 
and this should be done before they ripen their seeds. 
The drainage of pastures is frequently neglected because 
fields for pastures are usually selected on portions of 
the farm where the drainage is so imperfect that grain 
crops cannot be successfully grown. It should not be 
lost sight of, however, that not only the largest crops, 
but also the best and sweetest grass is grown on well- 
drained soil. Where land set aside for permanent pas- 
ture lacks fertility, a thorough top dressing of farm man- 
ure will show almost immediate returns. If the pasture 



CATTLE ON GRASS 107 

is to remain permanent for a series of years it will be 
profitable to add to the farmyard manure phosphorus 
in some form in which it will become slowly available. 
Bluegrass pastures of long standing or imperfect stand 
are greatly improved by thoroughly disking, after which 
some clover and timothy and possibly some bluegrass 
may be sown. A given acreage of pasture will furnish 
more feed if divided into medium-sized fields than it 
will if left in one large pasture. 

One of the principal points to be observed in the 
management of pastures is not to overstock them. 
Cattle require luxuriant, not closely cropped, grass and 
if they are furnished with a continuous and abundant 
supply of the former they will make satisfactory gains 
at low cost. 

FATTENING CATTLE ON GRASS 

To advise what is good practice in fattening cattle 
on grass one must know whether or not the cattle feeder 
wishes to sell "grass fat" or corn fed cattle, at what 
time the cattle are to be marketed, and in what way 
they have been wintered. 

To get satisfactory results from fattening cattle on 
grass alone the cattle used should be wintered very large- 
ly on roughage, for if they have acquired the habit of 
depending very largely upon a highly concentrated or 
grain ration for their nourishment they will shrink heav- 
ily when grain is withheld. If, however, cattle are to 
be fleshy enough to sell for killing purposes they must 
be in good, thrifty, and even fleshy condition. Cattle 
so conditioned for the market are seldom, if ever, fat 
enough to successfully compete in the market with corn- 
fed cattle, and unless land is cheap and corn high in 
price this practice seldom proves to be the most profit- 
able one. Gains are undoubtedly cheaper than where 
corn or other concentrates are fed, but the lower price 
which must be accepted for such cattle usually more 
than counterbalances this advantage. That is to say 



108 BEEF PRODUCTION 

it is usually good practice to feed corn to cattle turned 
to grass when the cattle feeder anticipates selling them 
in the large markets for slaughtering purposes. Where 
pasturage is abundant on cheap lands within easy access 
of any of our large cattle markets a good rental may 
be secured on the land by purchasing thin cattle at the 
opening of the pasturing season and running them on 
pasture without grain as long as pasture remains good, 
or until a favorable market renders an earlier sale ad- 
visable. In a majority of instances such cattle are sold 
to local cattle feeders or returned to the market to be 
sold for reshipment to the country as stockers or feeders. 

MANAGEMENT DEPENDS ON CONDITIONS 

If an attempt is made to fatten cattle with grain 
on grass their management will depend upon their age, 
condition, quality, and the time of marketing them. 
If they are young cattle, either calves or yearlings, and 
it is intended to market them during the pasturing 
season or before it is necessary to remove them from 
the pasture to dry lot, they will need to be grained 
continuously from the time they are turned to grass 
until marketed. With older cattle well wintered the 
question of management is largely one of whether the 
cattle feeder plans to market during early, mid, or late 
summer. If early — that is, by June 15 — the writer is 
strongly of the opinion that the cattle would better 
never be turned to grass, but finished in the dry lot. 
Such cattle are usually so far advanced in flesh at the 
season for turning to grass that if they are turned to 
grass the shrinkage is too great to make the method 
practicable. If the cattle are to be marketed about the 
middle of July it is then necessary to have the cattle 
on full feed when they are turned to grass and continue 
the same until marketed. By marketing by July 15 
the hottest weather of summer is avoided, which is usual- 
ly attended with myriads of pestiferous flies, which are 
extremely annoying to cattle and which materially 



CATTLE ON GRASS 109 

lessen the gains during this period. In changing from 
dry lot to pasture there are some questions arising that 
should receive attention. For example, "Is it better 
practice to turn fattening cattle to grass early or late 
in the spring?" The answer to this will depend upon 
the character of the grass and condition of the cattle. 
If there is a good quantity of old bluegrass left from 
the preceding season it is good practice to turn cattle 
to grass early, whereas, if all the grass is a fresh growth, 
severe scouring will likely follow such practice. Where 
pastures are eaten close the preceding fall, the grass 
should be allowed to get a good stand and get some 
substance before the cattle are turned on them. 

HOW TO TURN ON, GRASS 

If at all practicable, it is wise to turn cattle to grass 
for only an hour the first clay during the middle of the 
day after the cattle have filled on their regular feed. On 
the following day the cattle can be left on grass for a 
longer time and on each succeeding day until they are 
allowed to spend their entire time on the fields. This 
method occasions considerable trouble and is unneces- 
sary unless the cattle are quite fleshy. By many it 
is believed, and this belief is shared by the writer, that 
rather more pasturage for the season is secured by let- 
ting the grass get a good start in the spring. 

Corn may be nearly all, or in some instances all, the 
concentrate used. This will depend upon the age of 
the cattle, the kind of pasture, and how soon it is desired 
to finish the cattle. The younger the cattle, the more 
advisable is it to feed some concentrate rich in protein 
as a supplement to corn. Both oil meal and cottonseed 
meal are extensively used for this purpose. If it is de- 
sirable to finish older cattle in the shortest possible time, 
those feeds may be fed to advantage. If the pasture 
is made up quite largely of clover or alfalfa there is less 
need of these feeds than where cattle are run on blue- 
grass. The prevailing impression among cattle feeders 



110 BEEF PRODUCTION 

is that the practice of turning cattle to market before 
the hottest months to avoid heat and flies is increasing. 
Corn may be fed in the form of broken ear corn, shelled, 
corn and cob meal, or cornmeal. Where shelled corn 
is fed it has been found good practice to soak it for twelve 
hours before feeding, great care being exercised to pre- 
vent souring either before or after being placed before 
the steers. In whatever form the corn is fed, hogs 
should be provided to follow the steers. More hogs 
may be used to advantage behind steers fattening in 
summer on grain and grass than in winter in the dry lot, 
first because the hogs get a portion of their feed from 
the grass, and, second, the hogs are not required to wade 
about in mud to pick over the droppings. 

START ON NEW CORN IN SEPTEMBER 

If the cattle feeder wishes to carry the cattle through 
the summer without grain, fattening them off on the 
new corn, it will be advisable to start with the new corn 
some time in September, depending upon the location 
and season and increasing very gradually until the cattle 
are getting all they will eat. Thirty days is the mini- 
mum of time for getting cattle on feed in this way. If 
the grass is good the cattle will soon begin to leave more 
of the stalk than should be wasted. In this event only 
such amounts of the shock corn should be fed as will 
be economically eaten by the cattle, substituting snap- 
ped corn for a part of the shock corn. Grass fat cattle 
handled in this manner for ninety days will be in good 
marketable finish, especially if the corn is supplemented 
with oil meal or cottonseed meal. 



CHAPTER XVI. 

HOGS IN THE FEED LOT 

The hog is reckoned by cattle feeders as a most im- 
portant factor in cattle feeding operations and his defi- 
nite relation to this industry is a matter of much impor- 
tance. The facts and suggestions used in this discus- 
sion are based upon accurate data gathered by experi- 
ment and inquiry by the Illinois Experiment Station. 
The subject may be well divided as follows: 

1. Kind of hog best suited for following cattle in 
feed lot and pasture. 

2. Method of determining the best number to use. 

3. What may be done to increase the efficiency 
of the pig ? 

4. Results which may reasonably be expected. 
First, as to the kind of hog best suited for following 

cattle in the feed lot and pasture. It is seldom good 
practice to use pigs under six months of age because of 
the danger of injury in running about among the cattle, 
and further, the feed which they get from the droppings 
is not calculated to produce growth on the pigs. Brood 
sows are sometimes used to follow cattle. This practice 
may be followed with good results when fattening cattle 
are on grass, especially if the pasture furnishes clover or 
alfalfa pasturage for hogs as well as for cattle. But allow- 
ing brood sows to follow fattening cattle which are rather 
closely yarded in winter, and especially where no sepa- 
rate shelter is provided for the sows, is a practice to be 
discouraged. The kind of hogs that have proved to 
be best for following cattle are young thrifty shoats 
weighing about one hundred pounds each. These 
should be in thinnish flesh and of an active, strong 
boned type or breed. 

in 



112 BEEF PRODUCTION 

Second, as to method of determining the best num- 
ber to use. This is, perhaps, the most important factor 
in connection with the problem and yet one that has 
hitherto received but little consideration. The first 
point to consider is whether or not other feed than 
that in the droppings is to be given the hogs. If so, 
this largely simplifies the question. Judging from a 
large number of inquiries on this subject at least eighty 
per cent of the cattle feeders give hogs following fat- 
tening cattle feed in addition to that secured from the 
droppings of the steers. It is thought that this practice 
is common because it does away with the necessity of 
closely watching the pigs and droppings to see that just 
enough and not too many hogs are provided and the 
number of hogs which the cattle feeder wishes to fatten 
is in excess of what would be required to consume the 
undigested portions of the feed given the steers. This 
being the case it is usually much more convenient to 
run all the fattening hogs about the farm with the fatten- 
ing cattle. The fact that the fattening of hogs has been 
more generally followed with profit than the fattening 
of cattle has also had its influence upon the somewhat 
general adoption of this method. The writer is not 
familiar with any experimental data upon the subject 
as to whether or not greater returns are secured from 
the droppings alone where pigs are restricted to them 
or where fed additional feed. At the Illinois Experi- 
ment Station an effort has been made in each of the 
extensive cattle feeding experiments to determine the 
relation of the hog following the steer to the general 
proposition of cattle feeding. In each instance the 
number of hogs following the steers was regulated in 
such a way that they would thrive *on the droppings 
alone. Some of the more important facts brought out 
in these experiments are that there is very little hog 
feed in the droppings of steers fed silage. Silage is 
usually supplemented with corn in some other form and 
in such instances the approximate amount of available 



HOGS FOLLOWING CATTLE 113 

hog feed in the droppings should be determined upon 
the basis of this supplementary corn fed and the form in 
which it is fed, exclusive of that contained in the silage. 
Some cattle feeders feed rather more corn to cattle than 
they will clean up, throwing out the rejected portions 
to the hogs. This method increases the number of hogs 
that may profitably be run after cattle, but in the ex- 
periments referred to the hogs following the cattle did 
not have this advantage. In one experiment ten shoats 
were found to be about the right number to follow 
twenty-five steer calves fed on a light "wintering ration" 
of shock corn, whole oats, and clover hay. These shoats 
made a gain of 587 pounds in 88 days. During the 
same season in another winter feeding experiment where 
thirty-six two-year-olds and older steers were being fat- 
tened for the market, during the time shelled corn was 
fed, twenty-one hogs followed, and, when changed to meal 
twelve hogs only were used. These steers were fed in 
three lots, each lot getting a different ration. The hogs 
following the twelve steers fed corn and clover hay 
made 3.78 pounds per 100 pounds of shelled corn fed 
and .616 of a pound per 100 pounds ground corn when 
they were changed to a meal ration. The hogs in the lot 
getting corn, corn stover, and timothy hay made 3.665 
pounds gain per 100 pounds shelled corn fed the steers, 
while they made only .594 of a pound gain per 100 
pounds ground corn fed. The data illustrate two im- 
portant facts; first, that the gains on hogs following 
meal-fed steers are inconsiderable as compared with 
similar gains where the steers are getting whole corn , 
and second, that a nitrogenous roughage fed to the 
steers seems to favor, if only to a slight degree, large 
gains on hogs following steers so fed. 

The following table furnishes some valuable 
data which were secured from records kept on the feed- 
ing of 130 steers at the Illinois Experiment Station in 
ten different lots : 



114 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



Lot 

No. 



9 
10 



Form in which corn 
was fed 



Silage and corn- 
meal 

Ear corn 

Ear corn (without 
nitrogenous 
concentrates) . . 

Corn meal 

Corn meal (hay 
chaffed) 

Corn and cob meal 

Corn and cob meal 
(hay chaffed) . . 

Shock corn and 
ear corn 

Shelled corn (mud 
lot) 

Shelled corn 



Pigs per 
steer 



0.10 
0.53 



0.53 
0.27 

0.27 
0.27 

0.27 

0.60 

0.70 
0.70 



Pounds 

pork per 

steer 



6.30 
62.60 



74.13 
20.66 

20.02 
18.00 

24.00 

73.50 

85.80 
111.50 



Pork made 
per cwt. of 

corn fed 
steers, 

pounds 



.19* 
1.68 



.67 

.65 
.46 

.63 

1.81 

2.79 
3.61 



Per cent of 
feed given 
steers paid 
forbyhogs 
following, 
hogs val- 
ued at $5 
per cwt. 



.94 

9.70 



14.05 
3.00 

2.86 
2.60 

3.34 

12.72 

12.86 
16.67 



* Computed on basis of ear corn in silage and shock corn. 

This valuable table throws much light, not only on 
the question of the factors determining the number of 
hogs to use, but upon the other questions in the analysis 
of our subject, viz. : (3) " What may be done to increase 
the efficiency of the pig?" and (4) "Results which may 
reasonably be expected." 



CHAPTER XVII. 
FITTING STEERS FOR EXHIBITION 

The selection of animals to be fitted for exhibition 
purposes is obviously the first essential. It goes with- 
out saying that they should be the best individuals in 
the herd. Animals that will respond properly to fitting 
and develop into smooth, thick fleshed beasts should 
be selected. The head should be broad between the 
eyes, short from eye to nose, nostrils and mouth large, 
indicating great feed consuming capacity, eyes bright, 
yet placid, indicating a quiet disposition, legs short, 
body broad and deep, back and underline straight, tail- 
head broad and smooth with the tail well set on. Style 
and quality are essential points. Quality is to be looked 
for especially in the hair and bone. 

Care should be taken to select animals having all 
the advantage of age that is possible. For senior calf 
and yearling classes, animals dropped in September and 
October should be selected, while for junior classes, 
January and February born. For calf classes the se- 
lection is usually made when the calves are from three 
weeks to a month old, as the ones nearest perfect at that 
time are usually the ones that will make the best fin- 
ished animals. In selecting the calf, breeding should 
not be overlooked, for as are the sire and dam, so, to 
a greater or less extent, will be their offspring. 

After the selection has been made, the next impor- 
tant thing will be the feeding and management during 
the growing period. Success in this will depend largely 
upon three things : the comfort of the animals, a variety 
of good feeds, and the skill of the feeder. 

The calf should be allowed to nurse the dam as long 
as possible, as there is no other feed that will keep a 

115 



116 BEEF PRODUCTION 

calf growing like the mother's milk. In pleasant 
weather they should run out on pasture where they can 
get plenty of fresh air and sunshine, but care should 
be taken that they do not get too much exposure during 
storms. They should not be permitted to lie down in 
cold, damp places where they are apt to catch cold. 
When the winter comes on, the calves should be housed 
in roomy pens with plenty of air and sunshine, and pro- 
vided with a dry bed. During good weather they 
should be allowed the run of a sheltered lot provided 
with good water. At the age of from six to eight weeks 
they should be gradually started on a grain ration con- 
sisting of equal parts of shelled corn, whole oats, and 
bran, with all the clean clover or alfalfa hay they will 
clean up. 

At an early age the calves should be familiarized with 
grooming. This not only keeps the coat in a better con- 
dition, but also gets the animals used to handling, which 
will save a great deal of time and trouble later on. 

In the spring the calves should be put on grass, at 
first only for an hour or so during the middle of the day, 
and later on should be turned into the grass lot at night. 
This change to grass may be a period of little gain, but 
the grass cools their system and prepares them for the 
heavy feeding which is to follow. During the hot sum- 
mer months they should be allowed to run in the pas- 
ture at night, but through the heat of the day they 
should be protected from the heat and flies by being 
kept in a cool, well ventilated stable. Some feeders 
further protect them from flies by keeping them blank- 
eted, and by darkening the stables as much as possible 
without interfering with ventilation. 

When the animal is to be shown in the fall, there is a 
difference of opinion as to how soon it should be taken 
off the pasture, but it should certainly be taken in before 
the middle of the summer. This period between the 
time of removing from pasture until the time of the 
show, and especially during the last six weeks, is a time 



FITTING SHOW STEERS 117 

in which especial care should be taken, and one which 
calls for all the skill the feeder possesses. During this 
time it is necessary to put on the proper amount and 
quality of flesh, and the finish and bloom necessary to 
make a prize-winner. 

Probably the most important consideration during 
this latter period of preparation is the feeding. Some 
succulent food for its laxative and appetizing effect 
should be given, but care should be taken not to give 
so much of such feeds as to detract from the consistency 
of the flesh. Roots or corn silage serve well for this 
purpose. The grain ration should consist of ground 
oats, corn, and bran, with a little oil meal, but an excess 
of corn should be avoided, as smoothness of finish rather 
than excess of tallow is desired. For roughage, a good 
quality of bright clover or alfalfa hay should be fed. A 
variety of feeds is very desirable and everything should 
be done to tempt the appetite, but sudden or violent 
changes are very disastrous. If an animal shows a ten- 
dency to be paunchy, limit the amount of roughage 
given. An important consideration in feeding cattle 
for show is regularity. The custom is to feed three or 
four times a day and water about twice, and this should 
be done at the same time of day, as the cattle soon be- 
come able to know when feed time comes and will be up 
and looking for their feed with very great precision. 
They should be fed in loose feed boxes that can be taken 
out, thoroughly cleaned, and occasionally scalded. In 
order to restore a jaded appetite, the novice is frequently 
tempted to resort to a tonic, such as iron or some patent 
stock food which he sees so widely advertised; and al- 
though these things may have their place, this place 
certainly is not in the hands of an experienced feeder 
in fitting cattle for the show ring. The proper handling 
of a steer with a dull appetite is to withhold all feeds for 
a time and then give him a fill of grass. It is better to 
avoid a poor appetite by careful feeding than to 
attempt to cure it by means of some nostrum. 



118 BEEF PRODUCTION 

During the latter part of the feeding period, progress 
depends on nothing more than on content. The animal 
that eats its fill of any suitable ration that suits the pal- 
ate and then lies down in peace and quiet to ruminate 
will make good gains. Rumination is best performed 
when, for the time being, all the animal's energy is 
given to this one thing, and hence is best performed 
while lying down. 

When stabled, the animals should be well bedded 
with fresh, bright straw. The animals should be led from 
the stall twice daily and all droppings and wet straw 
removed and fresh straw put in. Attention should 
also be paid to ventilation. An abundance of fresh 
air should be provided, but the barn kept free from 
draughts. When the barn is well provided with win- 
dows it is a good plan to remove them and cover the 
openings with burlap. For fattening purposes, a dark- 
ened stable is preferred to one with too much light. 

As the show approaches they should be trained 
to stand squarely on their feet, with heads up, so as 
to appear to the best advantage. 

A good coat of hair should, if possible, be secured. 
It has been said that this depends not so much upon 
what is put on the hair as what is put inside the animal, 
aided somewhat by what is kept off the hair. Groom- 
ing should be commenced some weeks before the show, 
and for this purpose nothing should be used but a good 
bristle brush, aided by a flannel cloth or chamois skin. 
The steel curry combs and steel brushes are not in favor. 
A good use for the curry comb is to comb out the 
bristle brush. Some feeders prefer to keep the animals 
blanketed for six months before the show, "never letting 
the coats see the light of day. This, however, is not 
thought necessary or even advisable by most feeders. If 
the animals are kept in a darkened stable, blankets are 
unnecessary except during the last few days. The coat 
can be greatly improved by a weekly washing with soft 
water and a good toilet soap ; but never use hard water ; 



FITTING SHOW STEERS 119 

laundry soap, or washing powders. Some recommend 
giving the animals a daily wetting with soft water and 
a spray pump. The one great thing that is liable to 
play havoc with a coat of hair is founder, and especially 
grain founder. It cannot be detected until after the 
harm is done and naked spots appear all over the animal. 
Cattle just going onto full feed are especially liable to 
this. 

In fitting the horns, thoroughly remove the dead 
outer coat or covering. First use a sharp, heavy rasp, 
and finish up with a jackknife and finally with emery 
paper. Cover the horns with sweet-oil and allow a few 
hours to dry in, then smear them with paste made of 
sweet-oil and tripoli. Polish thoroughly with a wide 
strap or woolen bandage, and repolish with a strip of 
chamois skin and any good polishing powder. The 
strap should be wound once around the horn and the 
powder dusted under it, and friction enough obtained 
to melt the surface of the horn. 

Attention should be given to the hoofs. Where a 
steer is kept in a deeply bedded stall, the hoof is not 
subjected to friction and grows out long and unshapely, 
and as there is no moisture present the walls become dry 
and contract and the feet become feverish. The former 
defect can be remedied by trimming the hoofs back at 
frequent intervals, and the latter by making a clay 
puddle through which the animal should be led several 
times each day. 

With a considerable number of cattle to ship, a large 
furniture or vehicle car will be found best suited to the 
exhibitor's needs; with a smaller number to ship, an 
ordinary box-car with small doors in the end will be 
found very satisfactory. The sides of the car may be 
padded with burlap to prevent bruising. In loading 
the cattle they should always be tied to the side of the 
car and shipped "side to." It is not desirable to have 
them ride "end to" as they will be thrown forward 



120 BEEF PRODUCTION 

against their horns or backwards so as to pull on the 
halter rope. 

An animal should not be tied by the nose ring. Neck 
ropes would better be too light than too heavy, as it is 
better to have the rope than the animal's neck broken 
from an excessive jerk. Put enough straw under the 
animal to insure an easy ride; this should be about 
eighteen inches. Send along enough helpers to prop- 
erly care for the cattle. 

Securing "bloom" or just that desirable condition 
or stage of fatness that is most acceptable to the judge 
is, perhaps, the finest point of the art of fitting cattle 
for show, and the ability to bring out animals in a little 
better condition than others are able to do, is what char- 
acterizes some herdsmen as peculiarly skillful. There 
is, practically speaking, no danger of getting the calf or 
yearling too fat or "overdone," while with the two- 
year-old, such a condition is not uncommon. By fol- 
lowing the suggestions given above, however, this danger 
will be reduced to the minimum. While the calf or 
yearling is seldom too fat to show as a calf or yearling, 
they may be made too fat to carry on successfully with 
a view of making them acceptable show animals a year 
later. 



CHAPTER XVIII. 

ADVANTAGEOUS SEASONS FOR MARKETING 
VARIOUS GRADES OF CATTLE 

No attempt will be made to enlighten the cattle feeder 
as to when he may look for a good market or a "slump." 
The writer recognizes the fact that the best time to 
market cattle is when the highest market price may be 
secured, but the practical finisher of cattle understands 
that one cannot engage in the cattle feeding business 
and expect to strike the good market every time his 
stock is ready for the market. There are some general 
considerations, however, which should be fully under- 
stood. The knowledge of these facts and the formula- 
tion of cattle feeding practice accordingly will save the 
novice a large amount of needless loss. 

DEMAND FOR PRIME CATTLE 

There is usually a good demand every month in the 
year for both light and heavy weight, strictly prime 
cattle, for the high-class beef trade of the country; that 
is, such as is used by the wealthier families and high- 
grade hotels, and restaurants. Because of its use there 
is not an unlimited demand for such beef, and, if prime 
cattle, from which this grade of beef is cut, are offered in 
excess of requirements, prices seek a lower level. Prices 
for such cattle on the hoof are regulated from month to 
month, according to the supply. During the Christmas 
season such cattle are required in large numbers as has 
been said in Chapter XI.: "From November 23 to De- 
cember 15 buyers for local slaughter, shipment, and 
export are on the market until their orders are filled. 
Exporters who buy for the foreign holiday trade usually 
buy most of their cattle from November 25 to 27, 

121 



122 BEEF PRODUCTION 

although these dates may vary a little one way or the 
other, depending upon the days the export boats sail 
for foreign ports. Ordinarily, exporters take from one- 
fourth to one-third of the total supply of Christmas 
cattle for both dead and live export. The larger pro- 
portion of holiday beef is exported alive, and for this 
purpose cattle possessing fancy quality and thick fat, 
weighing from 1300 to 1500 pounds are wanted. From 
1300 to 1400 pounds is a popular weight, although they 
use some prime 1100 to 1200-lb. cattle for that trade 
and a few weighing as much as 1600 pounds. For 
the New York and Eastern holiday trade, the first ten 
days of December, particularly from the 5th to the 8th, 
is considered a good time to market. For the Chicago 
city trade and nearby cities and towns, from Decem- 
ber 10 to 15; New York, Boston, and some other 
Eastern cities use more heavy or good weight cattle 
than the Western cities. They also use a good propor- 
tion of yearlings, and light weights, and the light 
and medium weight prime cattle seem to be getting 
more popular each year." 

DEMAND FOR BABY BEEF 

Outside of the Christmas market, during which there 
is the demand for baby beeves indicated, there is not 
much preference as to the most favorable season for 
marketing such cattle. There is a good demand the 
year around and prices depend upon the supply from 
month to month. If there is any preference it would be 
during the hot weather months. From 800 to 1000 
pounds is a popular weight for yearlings and 1100 to 
1300 pounds for two-year-olds. Some buyers prefer a 
weight of from 1000 to 1100 pounds, and then again 
there is a good demand for 600 to 800-lb. steers and 
heifers. There are not as many two-year-olds as 
yearlings used. There is no discrimination against 600 
to 700-lb. baby beeves, if prime. It cannot be too 
strongly emphasized, however, that baby beef to sell high 



WHEN TO MARKET 123 

must be prime in quality and finish. Hundreds of young 
cattle are annually shipped to the market that bring 
prices which disappoint the feeder, and most frequently 
because he has not made them fat enough. Taking the 
year around the prices for baby beeves of quality and 
finish will average well with those of older and heavier 
cattle of same quality and condition. 

DEMAND FOR EXPORT CATTLE OTHER THAN AT 
CHRISTMAS 

The most profitable time generally for feeders to 
market export cattle at the Western markets (barring 
Christmas time for that grade of export cattle) is winter, 
spring, and early summer months. The reasons are 
that during the late summer and fall months Canada 
usually markets a good many grass cattle; also they use 
more or less of the Northwest range cattle for export 
trade, both dead and alive. Of course, the extent of 
this latter depends upon the condition or fat of the 
range cattle. As to the activity of the demand during 
the different months or seasons of the year, that depends 
to a considerable extent upon the foreign market and 
their supply of cattle. Some years Canada has a heavy 
supply of exports; then again it is moderate. The 
dressed beef trade of the Argentine is increasing materi- 
ally, and this is all having its effect upon the demand 
for export cattle from this country. 

DEMAND FOR COMMON CATTLE 

Such cattle are usually best marketed from March 
1 to June 1. They could not, however, be said to be 
"out of season" any time from January 1 to July 1. 
After July 1 they come in competition with the cheap 
W T estern range cattle. 



CHAPTER XIX. 

MARKETABLE CONDITION. PREPARING 
CATTLE FOR SHIPMENT 

WHEN IS A STEER READY FOR MARKET? 

If this question were put to the buyers of any of the 
packing companies they would instinctively answer, 
"When fat, or in a condition popularly spoken of as fin- 
ished." Their answer to the question would be entirely 
from their standpoint and not from the standpoint of 
the cattle feeder. It is undoubtedly true that one of 
the commonest faults among market cattle is lack of 
condition, and this fault is most common with cattle 
fed by beginners. However, even experienced cattle 
feeders frequently ship cattle to market that, to fully 
ripen, would require full feeding for sixty, and, in some 
instances, as many as ninety days. Clearly, therefore, 
experienced cattle feeders must believe that they get 
larger net returns by so handling cattle, or they would 
have long ago discontinued the practice. The writer 
appreciates the fact that it takes the highest finish to 
bring top prices, but at the same time it must be borne 
in mind that a steer must be something more than fat 
or ripe to sell as prime. 

If experienced cattle feeders were asked to express 
an opinion as to when a steer is ready for market, they 
would almost universally agree that he is ready for 
market, or, at any rate, should be shipped to market at 
a time when he will net the feeder the greatest profit. 
This is an extremely difficult matter to figure out, for 
the condition of fat cattle that will net the feeder the 
largest profit may not be, and often is not, the con- 
dition that will bring the top price for any given grade 
or quality of cattle. Another factor that plays an im- 

124 



MARKETABLE CONDITION 125 

portant part is the general supply and demand of the 
market at a given time. A degree of condition that 
might yield the largest profit at one time with a strong 
and high market might not be the condition for greatest 
profit when the cattle market is weak and low. This 
whole question cannot be intelligently answered without 
an intimate knowledge of at least the following factors : 

1. Age of cattle. 

2. Quality or breeding of cattle. 

3. Condition of market. 

4. The relative cost of putting cattle in prime condi- 
tion as compared with the cost of merely warming them 
up and also of the so-called half-fat condition. 

These points are not capable of other than the most 
general treatment. 

As regards age, it may be said that it is extremely 
difficult to get a steer under two years of age too fat to 
suit the trade, and within certain reasonable limits such a 
young steer, if well bred, may usually be put in prime 
condition profitably, providing market prices and cost of 
feeds and feeders are such that there is profit in handling 
that kind of cattle at all. With the three or four-year- 
old steer the situation is entirely changed. The process 
of feeding a steer of such an age, until he is prime in con- 
dition is an expensive job and will not usually pay 
unless such animal is well bred. This suggests that as 
a general proposition, cattle of the commoner grades 
(speaking now only of their quality or breeding) do not 
require or acquire as high a finish as the better bred ones. 
The degree of finish which should be aimed at in any 
particular instance will depend upon the condition of 
the market and the cost of feeds. Obviously when feed 
is high and fat cattle are low, the securing of high finish 
is usually attended with loss, whereas if both feed and 
cattle are low there might be a possibility of profit 
following the securing of high finish. If cattle are high 
and feed high, providing feeders have been purchased 
at a reasonable price and the quality is good, it usually 



126 BEEF PRODUCTION 

pays to feed until choice to prime condition is secured. 
A more intimate and accurate knowledge of most 
of these factors is in the possession of progressive live 
stock commission companies, and the cattle feeder who 
does not keep in close touch with such is not likely to 
form as wise conclusions without their help, although 
the cattle feeder must needs do some hard thinking for 
himself. 

In conclusion, we do not wish it inferred that the 
writer leans to the opinion that it generally pays best 
to stop short of prime condition. We have inferred 
that at times it does and at other times it does not. In 
case prime condition seems desirable, the following sug- 
gestions as to how to judge it may be helpful: 

Fullness at base of tongue, fullness or a roll of fat in 
front of point of shoulder, a full twist; a large, mellow 
cod; a low, full, thick flank that stands out and rolls 
visibly as the animal walks; fullness and smoothness at 
rump and tail-head indicate that degree of fatness which 
is essential to the highest quality in beef. These points, 
which are to be judged by sight rather than by touch, 
are the.ones most depended upon by buyers at the yards. 

Figure 13 illustrates a steer in a half-fat and prime 
condition 

PREPARING CATTLE FOR SHIPMENT 

There are shippers who, by divers practices, have se- 
cured an abnormal fill at the market, or, in other words, 
have been successful in making their cattle weigh more 
than they should by inducing them to drink an unusual 
amount of water when they reach the market. It should 
not be forgotten that there are past masters of the 
"filling" process at all our leading markets, and many 
of them operate outside the fat cattle division, too. The 
trained eye of the buyer of fat cattle is always on the 
lookout for cattle that have filled unusually well, and 
when he sets the price on such he is sure to discriminate 
against them in value per hundredweight, as he knows 



MARKETABLE CONDITION 



127 





Fig. 13. The same steer in a half-fat and prime condition. 



128 BEEF PRODUCTION 

there will be a heavy shrinkage when slaughtered. Any 
practice which tends toward securing an abnormal fill 
on cattle at the yards is neither a legitimate practice 
nor is it likely, in the long run, to prove a paying propo- 
sition from the standpoint of the shipper. On the other 
hand, it is a well-known fact that unless some precau- 
tions are taken before shipment, the cattle are apt to 
s<?our and shrink abnormally. The shipper is justified 
therefore, in using legitimate methods of preventing 
scours, not only to avoid an abnormal shrinkage, but also 
to prevent the cattle arriving at the market in a filthy 
condition, which, from the standpoint of the buyer, 
would not add to their attractiveness. 

MANAGEMENT IS LARGEST FACTOR 

It may have been inferred from what has been said 
that the principal point to be observed in shipping cattle 
without too much shrinkage is following some peculiar 
method of feeding, but the writer believes that the larg- 
est factor is the management of the cattle — that is, they 
should be so quietly handled that they do not become 
excited or heated. If possible, driving should be done 
in the cool of the morning or evening. There are some 
feeds, which, if the cattle have access to them prior to 
shipment, will be more likely to cause scours than others. 
These are shelled corn, cornmeal, oil meal, silage, clover 
hay, alfalfa, cow-pea hay, and grass. Cattle that are fat- 
tened on grass and grain during the early part of the 
season may well be yarded for a day or two before ship- 
ment and fed timothy hay and a considerably reduced 
grain ration. 

Fat cattle shipped from the dry lot, if receiving clover 
or alfalfa for roughage, should be changed to timothy 
hay at least twenty-four hours before shipment. No 
full grain ration should be given after twelve hours be- 
fore shipment, although it is advisable at times, and 
especially if the cattle have been fattened on shelled corn 
or meal, to add a liberal amount of oats or bran to the 



SHIPPING CATTLE 129 

feed. Water should be withheld for six hours before 
shipment. 

BED CAR WELL AND BO NOT OVERLOAD 

If, in addition to the above precautions, care is 
taken to bed the car well and not overload, the cattle 
should arrive on the market fresh and clean and will 
fill normally, which, it is unnecessary to say, should be 
the object of the shipper. Cattle so shipped should 
make honest weights for the producer and buyer and 
healthy meat for the consumer. 

It is obvious that the management of cattle before 
shipment will necessarily vary considerably not only 
because of differences in their condition, and the rations 
upon which they have been fed, but also the distance 
from market and the* time they will be on the road, and 
whether it is necessary to unload and feed enroute. 
Some of the suggestions offered will apply only to the 
preparation of cattle for shipment where they are not 
to be on the road to exceed twelve hours. 



CHAPTER XX. 

LICE, MANGE, RINGWORM, LUMP-JAW, 
BLACKLEG, AND TEXAS FEVER 1 

Cattle Mange (Texas Itch, Cattle Scab, or Range 
Itch) is a skin disease affecting cattle only, and is caused 
by a minute animal parasite Psoroptes communes very 
closely related to the mite that causes scab in sheep. 
It is not known that the sheep mite ever infest cattle, 
nor will the cattle mite injure sheep. The mite is very 
small, barely visible to the naked eye. It can very read- 
ily be detected by scraping the surface of the skin with 
a sharp instrument and allow the substance scraped off 
to remain five to ten hours in a clean, wide-mouthed bot- 
tle. White specks will appear on the surface of the 
glass, which, on examination with a lens, show the de- 
tails of the parasite. 

Cattle mange appears to be more troublesome dur- 
ing the late fall and winter than at any other time of 
the year, and usually disappears in the spring when the 
cattle are turned out on pasture. Cattle of all ages may 
become affected, but it seems to be more pronounced 
in yearlings and bulls; on bulls perhaps, because they 
come in contact with more animals and are more liable 
to become infected. 

The first symptoms noticed are intense itching of 
the skin, usually in the region of the neck and shoulders, 
and shedding of the hair on the neck and withers. In 
aggravated cases the irritation may extend all over the 
body, but the most prominent points where the disease 

ir The information here presented on Lice and Mange is taken 
from Bulletin of the Agricultural Experiment Station of Nebraska, 
vol. XIV., Article IV.; on Ringworm from Report of Bureau of 
Animal Industry, Diseases of Cattle. 

130 



LICE AND MANGE 131 

first appears are the base of the tail, the neck, withers, 
and shoulders. The skin becomes thickened and very 
dry in places, the hair dropping off, leaving large bald 
patches of thickened and callous skin. As the disease 
progresses, there is an intense itching, and the animal will 
be seen rubbing itself against fences, posts, buildings, 
etc., sometimes causing large bleeding scratches and 
sores. Animals in the advanced stages of the disease eat 
very little, and spend the most of their time in rubbing. 
The disease spreads very rapidly throughout a herd, and 
appears in from four to six weeks after exposure. It 
spreads by direct contact of diseased with healthy animals, 
and railroad cars, stock-yards, mangers, sheds, posts, 
chutes, and fences may also be sources of infection. 

The method of treatment advised is the application 
by spraying or dipping, using a liquid that will kill the 
parasites. In small herds the liquid may be applied 
by means of a swab, brush, or spray pump, but even on 
a small scale it is expensive and impracticable, and is 
very likely not to be thoroughly done, as it is hard to 
get the liquid into all the wrinkles and folds by this 
method. The best plan is to dip in a properly con- 
structed dipping vat, and this method is coming to be 
the one most used especially in the great grazing sections, 
where cooperative dipping plants are operated. 

There are numerous dips on the market, and no 
doubt they all have their merits, but the ones found 
to be most effective are the coal tar preparations, such 
as Chloro-naphtholeum and Zenoleum. These should 
be used in a 3^ or 4 per cent solution, the latter being 
preferred. In mixing the dips, soft water should be 
used, and if this cannot be obtained, add to the hard 
water sufficient washing powder or soda to soften it, 
otherwise the preparations will not thoroughly mix with 
the water. 

Great care should be taken to make the dipping 
thorough. A simple plunge in and out is not sufficient; 
the cattle should be immersed from one to three minutes. 



132 BEEF PRODUCTION 

Previous to the dipping, the scales should be loosened 
up with a brush or broom to allow the mixture to thor- 
oughly penetrate the diseased areas. See that the head 
and all parts of the body are immersed. After cattle 
are dipped they should not be allowed to go back to 
infested pastures or stables, or be allowed to mix with 
infected cattle, as they would thus become reinfected 
and all the benefits of the clipping would be lost. 

In order to make the operation a success, the dipping 
should be repeated within ten days to kill the parasites 
that have hatched out since the last dipping, before 
they have time to lay their eggs. 

Pregnant cows and heifers should not be dipped 
after they are more than three or four months advanced, 
and even previous to that time care should be taken to 
avoid crowding in the chutes. 

It is best to dip twice in the fall and twice in the 
spring, at intervals of ten days. The dipping usually 
costs from five to eight cents per head. 

LICE 

The two most common kinds of lice found on cattle 
are the long-nosed ox louse and the short-nosed ox 
louse. The methods of eradication are the same as for 
mange. 

RINGWORM 

There are two kinds of ringworm, Tinea tonsurans 
and Tinea favosa. Tinea tonsuraus is caused by a 
minute fungus which affects the hair and the epidermic 
layer of the skin. It forms circular patches on the body 
where the hair falls off and the skin becomes slightly 
inflamed, followed by the formation of scaly, brittle 
crusts. After the patches become incrusted they have 
a silvery gray appearance, and are confined mostly to 
the head and neck. It is a very common disease among 
young cattle in the winter and spring. It is highly 
contagious, being readily transmitted from one animal 



RINGWORM 133 

to another, and is communicable to man. The disease 
is attended with more or less itching. 

Tinea favosa is caused by another fungus which 
affects the hair follicle and the cuticle surrounding it. 
Small crusts form which increase in size and thickness 
and then become elevated at their margin, forming a 
cup-shaped scab, which gives the disease its distinctive 
character. The crusts are of a pale sulphur-yellow 
color at first and grow darker with age. The disease 
has a peculiar odor, resembling that of mice or musty 
straw. It may be communicated to cattle by man, 
mice, cats, etc., all of which are subject to the disease. 

The treatment of either form of the disease is to 
remove all crusts by washing with soap and water, then 
apply acetic acid, sulphur ointment, tincture of iodine, 
or nitrate of mercury ointment, once a day. Disinfect 
the stables and whitewash them to destroy the spores 
scattered by the crusts. 

LUMP-JAW (ACTINOMYCOSIS) l 

This disease is caused by a vegetable organism, sup- 
posed to be a fungus, known as actinomyces. The 
fungus is composed of minute, radiating, club-shaped 
particles, hence it is known as "ray fungus." The parts 
of the animal commonly affected are the bones of the 
upper and lower jaws, and the soft tissue between the 
two branches of the lower jaw, although it sometimes 
affects the lungs and other internal organs. The disease 
is characterized by peculiar enlargements around the 
head, or other parts affected. These enlargements 
develop in time from the size of a hen's egg up to that 
of a man's head. 

The natural habitat of the fungus causing the disease 
is supposed to be on forage grown on low, wet ground, 
and especially on the awns of barley. As the animal 
masticates such forage, abrasions of the soft tissues of the 



1 The information here presented is taken mainly from Reynolds' 
Veterinary Studies. 



134 BEEF PRODUCTION 

mouth are made, which serve as channels of entrance 
for the fungus. It may also be introduced in other 
ways, as decayed teeth or the shedding of milk teeth. 

Although the matter has received quite a good deal 
of attention, not much has been done in the way of 
prevention. The disease does not spread directly from 
one animal to another, but when the tumors reach their 
growth they break open on the outside and discharge 
a yellowish substance which is full of the ray fungi. 
An animal with such a discharging abscess would, of 
course, infect food in mangers, feed troughs, and grass 
in the pasture and thus offer an excellent opportunity 
for infection of other animals. Animals with discharging 
abscesses should be killed or confined away from other 
animals. Pastures in which cases of lump-jaw seem 
to develop rather commonly should be placed under 
cultivation. 

The two most common methods of cure are (1) to cut 
out the tumor, and (2) the iodide of potassium treatment. 
The cutting method is very effective in the early stages 
of development, but should be undertaken only by a 
trained veterinarian on account of the proximity to 
large blood vessels. Dr. M. H. Reynolds, B. S. A., D. 
V. M., M. D., professor of veterinary medicine, Univer- 
sity of Minnesota, outlines the potassium iodide method 
as follows: 

Give by means of the mouth, either as a drench or 
dissolved in the drinking water. The daily dose is 
about one-fourth dram per hundred pounds live weight. 
"This dose is given daily until the animal seems to get 
off feed and discharges freely from the eyes and nose, 
indicating something of a catarrhal disturbance of these 
mucous membranes. These conditions indicate that 
the treatment should be discontinued for three or four 
days. During this period a mild cathartic of epsom 
salts should be given, about one pound to 1000 pounds 
live weight. This should be dissolved in water and 
given as a drench. The iodide treatment may then be 



BLACKLEG 135 

continued for another period of six to ten days when 
it may be necessary to discontinue again and give another 
'dose of epsom salts. Treatment should be continued 
until the tumor is reduced to about one-third of its 
original size; it may then be discontinued." 

The statement has been made that one animal in 
every 1600 or 1700 cattle that go to the Chicago market 
has lump- jaw. The government inspection rule relative 
to the disease reads as follows : 

"Actinomycosis, or lump- jaw: First, if the carcass 
is in a well nourished condition and there is no evidence 
upon post-mortem examination that the disease has 
extended from a primary area of infection in the head, 
the carcass may be passed; but the head, including the 
tongue shall be condemned. Second, if the carcass is 
in a well nourished condition and the disease .has ex- 
tended beyond the primary area of infection, the dis- 
position shall be made in accordance with the regulations 
relating to tuberculosis." 

BLACKLEG 1 

Blackleg, blackquarter, quarter-ill, or symptomatic 
anthrax is a rapidly fatal infectious disease of young 
cattle which was formerly regarded as being the same as 
anthrax, but recent investigations have definitely 
proved that they are entirely different diseases. It is 
caused by a minute rod-like bacillus which lives only 
in the absence of oxygen, as in the ground or in the tis- 
sues of animals. It enters the animal body by means of 
abrasions of the skin or of the mucous membrane lining 
of the mouth, throat, and other portions .of the digestive 
tract. Foreign writers state that the disease is found 
among sheep and goats, but in this country it rarely, 
if ever, affects any animals except cattle. The disease 
may attack suckling calves, but is most likely to oc- 

lr The information here presented is taken from the Report on 
the Diseases of Cattle of the Bureau of Animal Industry, Bulletin 
122 of the Kansas, and Bulletin 75 of the Virginia Experiment 
Stations. 



136 BEEF PRODUCTION 

cur in calves between six and eighteen months of age. 
It is not very common after two years of age and very 
rare after three, but occasionally occurs in aged animals. 

The symptoms of the disease appear from one to 
three days after infection has taken place, and are char- 
acterized by a loss of appetite and rumination (chewing 
the cud), dullness, and a high fever, the temperature 
rising as high as 107°F. The disease is invariably 
accompanied by a tumor or swelling on one or more of 
the limbs, which causes lameness or stiffness. Some- 
times the animal is stiff in the neck, all over, or in one 
side of the body. These tumors or swellings under the 
skin are the most important characteristic of the disease, 
usually appearing a few hours after the constitutional 
symptoms described above, but sometimes appearing 
before. The tumors may appear on the thighs, neck, 
shoulder, breast, flanks, or rump, but never below the 
knee or hock joints. At first these tumors are small, 
but they rapidly increase in size and become less painful, 
and in a few hours the circulation is arrested and the 
part becomes cold and painless. When stroked or 
handled, a peculiar crackling sound is heard under the 
skin due to gas formed as the bacteria multiply. When 
cut into, a frothy, dark-red, disagreeably smelling fluid 
is discharged. 

The animal invariably dies in from one to three days, 
death being preceded by increasing weakness, difficult 
breathing, and occasional attacks of violent convulsions. 
After death the affected muscles look as if badly bruised 
and filled with thick, dark blood and gases. The muscle 
tissue is soft and easily torn. The features which dis- 
tinguish the disease from anthrax are the unchanged 
spleen and the ready clotting of the blood. In anthrax 
the spleen is very much enlarged, the blood tarry, 
coagulating freely. The anthrax carbuncles and swell- 
ings differ from the blackleg swellings in not containing 
gas, in being hard and solid, and in causing death less 
rapidly. 



BLACKLEG 137 

Thus far no effective remedy has been discovered. 
Certain drugs seem to have been beneficial in a few 
cases, but a thorough trial has proved them valueless. 
Some recommend making long incisions in the swellings 
and allowing the fluid to escape and then washing the 
parts several times daily with an antiseptic solution. 
This treatment has not proved effective, and affords an 
excellent opportunity for the spread of the disease to 
other animals, as this fluid is full of the germs. Pre- 
ventive rather than curative measures should be em- 
ployed. The disease seems to be more common on wet, 
swampy pastures than on those that are more dry. 
When the disease appears in a herd, all healthy animals 
should be removed from the pasture and the affected 
ones allowed to remain. The disease is not directly com- 
municable from one animal to another, but the fluid 
which may escape from the affected parts of diseased 
animals will pollute fodder, forage, etc. The bodies of 
dead animals should be burned to prevent the dissemin- 
ation of the germs by dogs, crows, buzzards, and other 
scavengers. The burning should be done where the 
animal dies, as dragging or hauling from one place to 
another only serves to spread the disease germs. The 
body should not be opened, as this permits the escape 
of the germs. The pasture and other infected areas 
should be freed from the germs by allowing the grass to 
grow up and when dry burn it off and cultivate the land 
for one season. 

The best method of prevention is by means of vac- 
cination with virus which has been prepared from the 
meat of the affected parts of diseased animals. This 
vaccine is now prepared and sent out by the Bureau of 
Animal Industry and various State Agricultural Experi- 
ment Stations. As the methods of administering differ 
with the sample, and full directions accompany all that 
is sent out, there is no need of going into details of the 
method of application. 



138 BEEF PRODUCTION 

TEXAS FEVER 1 

It is not the purpose of the author to discuss the 
question of Texas fever from the standpoint of the 
Southern cattle raiser, but merely to give some of the 
precautions necessary to pervent its introduction into 
our great corn-belt and beef producing region. 

The Texas fever, otherwise known as tick fever, 
splenic fever, or Southern cattle fever, is caused by a 
microscopic parasite Piroplasma bigeminum and the 
intermediate stage of the development of this parasite 
takes place in the cattle tick Boophilus annulatus, 
making this tick the indirect but absolutely essential 
factor in the natural production of the disease. Above 
the latitude where the cattle tick is destroyed by the 
cold of winter the disease can be thoroughly controlled 
by keeping Southern tick-infested cattle from passing 
through the country during certain seasons. 

The Department of Agriculture has enacted sanitary 
regulations for the control of cattle shipments from the 
infected districts. The purpose of these regulations is 
to prevent the transportation of cattle ticks from in- 
fested areas to those that are not infested, either upon 
cattle or in stock cars or other conveyer, during the 
season of the year when infection is possible. 

The quarantine line (the line south of which the 
fever exists), as determined in 1905, starts in Virginia, 
on the Atlantic Coast, and passes in a westerly direction 
through Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, 
and a small portion of Kentucky, along the northern 
border of Arkansas and Indian Territory, thence 
through Oklahoma and Texas to the Rio Grande and 
the Mexican border, whence it passes along the southern 
boundary of New Mexico and Arizona and across the 
central portion of California to the Pacific Coast. 
Each year districts are being freed from the cattle tick 

1 The information here presented is taken from Louisiana Bul- 
letin No. 82; Farmers' Bulletin No. 261; Bulletin No, 78, Bureau 
of Animal Industry. 



TEXAS FEVER 139 

and the boundary line gradually pushed farther south. 

Cattle from the quarantined district may be shipped 
out without inspection between November 1 and January 
31, inclusive (the open season), without restrictions 
other than may be enforced by local regulations at the 
point of destination. At the present time no cattle 
shall go out of quarantine, except for immediate slaugh- 
ter, during the period between the dates February 1, 
and October 31 (the closed period). These cattle must 
be slaughtered within two weeks after arrival at their 
destination, and the regulations of the Secretary of 
Agriculture concerning their handling and movement 
shall be enforced. The following is an abstract of the 
regulations in force May 1, 1905: 

"Cattle coming from the infected districts during 
the closed season can not be driven, but must be con- 
veyed in cars or boats placarded, 'Southern cattle,' and 
bills of lading, way bills, and conductors' manifests shall 
have this information written upon them. When the 
cattle are unloaded for feeding, watering, or other pur- 
poses, they must be placed in pens reserved for such 
animals only, in which native stock is not allowed, and 
a large sign with the words 'Quarantine pens' or 'Quar- 
antine yards' must be conspicuously placed on all such 
inclosures. On unloading at their destination, only the 
chutes, pens, and alleyways reserved for Southern cattle 
shall be used. Before the cars or boats are again used 
their entire interior must be thoroughly washed with 
water, after the removal of all litter and manure, and 
then disinfected with a mixture of 1^ pounds of lime 
and 34 pound of 100 per cent carbolic acid to each 
gallon of water, or with a solution made by dissolving 
4 ounces of cloride of lime to each gallon of water. 
All chutes, alleyways, and pens used enroute and at 
destination, but not reserved for the exclusive use of 
Southern cattle shall be so disinfected. Where animals 
are yarded adjacent to animals from above the line, at 



140 BEEF PRODUCTION 

least a ten-foot space not occupied by cattle must be 
left between, on each side of which shall be a tight board 
fence not less than five feet high." 

In spite of all precautions that can be taken, there 
are occasional outbreaks of the disease north of the 
quarantine line. When such an outbreak occurs there 
are several ways of freeing the cattle of ticks: (1) pick- 
ing or brushing them off; (2) smearing or spraying the 
animals with a disinfecting solution; (3) dipping the 
"ticky" animals in a vat containing a solution capable 
of killing the animals and not injuring the cattle; (4) 
the "soiling system." 

Picking or scraping off the ticks. — This is a laborious 
undertaking but may be quite effective on a small herd, 
if care is taken to go over all parts of the animal fre- 
quented by the ticks, especially under the belly, around 
the tail, and on the inside of the legs. They should be 
scraped off with a dull knife or curry comb and burned. 
The cattle should be gone over at least three times a 
week during the tick season and should be frequently 
examined later to see that none are missed. 

Smearing or spraying with a disinfecting solution. — 
In small herds, smearing the cattle with a mixture of 
one gallon of kerosene, one gallon of cottonseed oil, and 
one pound of sulphur, or with a mixture of equal parts of 
cottonseed oil and crude petroleum, or with Beaumont 
crude oil alone has proved efficacious when applied to 
the skin two or three times a week during the tick sea- 
son. Where a large number of animals are to be treated, 
but not sufficient to make it advisable to construct a 
dipping vat, spraying the infected animals gives ver}^ 
good results if thoroughly done. Spray with Beaumont 
crude oil or a five per cent solution of any standard coal 
tar dip applied with a force-pump. 

Dipping in a vat. — The Bureau of Animal Industry 
has been experimenting for a number of years on the 
subject of dips, and the most successful one found is 
Beaumont crude oil, obtained from certain Texas wells. 



TEXAS FEVER 141 

This is very successful in killing the ticks and at the 
same time does not materially injure the cattle, and has 
been found superior to any of the dips tested. After 
dipping, the animals should not be unduly exposed to 
the hot sun or driven long distances, but should be given 
plenty of good food and water. Dipping should not be 
done till after the cattle have shed their winter coats. 
The method usually adopted in dipping cattle is to 
construct a narrow swimming tank with a chute at one 
end for the entrance of the cattle, and a sloping exit 
and a dripping floor at the other. 

The "soiling method." — This method of freeing the 
cattle of ticks is based upon a knowledge of the life 
history of the ticks. The time required for the female 
tick to lay eggs and the latter to hatch, in other words, 
the time spent on the ground, is rarely less than three 
weeks, and the time required for the seed ticks to molt 
and mature, or the time spent on the cattle is usually 
from twenty to forty-five days. When the cattle are 
to be freed from ticks, they should be kept in a small 
tick-free enclosure for three weeks, when many of the 
ticks will have fallen off. They should then be removed 
and placed in a similar enclosure for another three 
weeks, and to make sure of the job, they should 
remain two weeks in a third enclosure. By this time 
the youngest ticks that were on the cattle at the start 
will have matured and dropped off, and as the animals 
are removed from each pen before they could possibly 
have become reinfected with seed ticks that hatch from 
the eggs of the females that fell off, they are now tick 
free. The same pens cannot be used repeatedly for 
this purpose without thorough disinfection. Care should 
be taken that hay fed the animals in these pens is from 
non-infested fields. 

Morgan, of the Louisiana Station, has outlined what 
is known as the "feed-lot" method of ridding cattle 
and pastures of ticks during a single summer. In this 
method a portion of ground is set apart, one-half of 



142 BEEF PRODUCTION 

which is sufficiently large to accommodate the number 
of cattle on hand. The area selected should be conveni- 
ent to plenty of feed and water. Surround and divide 
the lot with a double fence, leaving a space of eight to 
ten feet. As the ticks can crawl only a short distance, 
there is thus no danger of their getting from one side to 
the other or outside of the inclosure. Feed the cattle 
for twenty days on one side, then remove them to the 
other side for fifteen or twenty days longer. By this 
time every tick will have dropped and the cattle can 
then be placed on tick-free pastures. After the animals 
are removed the feed-lots should be immediately plowed 
and thoroughly cultivated, and their edges completely 
sprayed with crude petroleum, zenoleum solutions, or 
other substances destructive to tick life. By this 
method entire farms may be cleaned in a single summer 
of not exceeding four months. 



CHAPTER XXI. 

EQUIPMENT FOR CATTLE FEEDING 

Figure 14 is taken from a photograph of a very 
satisfactory open shed and feed storage building. The 
shelter consists of a building twenty by twenty-six feet, 
twenty-foot posts, with two wings each twenty by thirty 
feet. This makes a shelter twenty by eighty feet. 
The upper floor of the middle portion is used for the 
storage of feed, which is fed out into the bunks below. 
Another bin ten by twenty feet occupies the lower 
floor of the main building, which is used for the storage 
of corn. The yards and shelter are designed to accom- 
modate about fifty cattle. The paved lot adjoining is 
twenty-four by eighty feet, the bricks are laid flat on 
six inches of gravel, the latter being packed by the tramp- 
ing of horses until a solid surface was secured. Cement 
wash was applied after the bricks were laid. The curb- 
ing consists of curb-stones eighteen inches wide and 
three inches thick set edgewise into the ground. Ad- 
joining the paved lot is a yard containing about one- 
half acre in which the hay rack is located and where the 
cattle are allowed to remain a large part of the time. 

FEED-BUNK WITH PLATFORMS FOR MUDDY LOT 

The floors are made by placing five white oak 
sixteen-foot two-by-fours on edge, and laying a floor 
on them of two-inch plank cut in six-foot lengths, making 
a floor six by sixteen feet. The two-by-fours are 
beveled at each end like sled runners, and a hole bored 
in the end of the middle plank for a clevis so that the 
floor can be dragged around. 

The bunk should be constructed of oak, as it is the 
most durable and the cheapest in the end. The bed 

143 



144 BEEF PRODUCTION 

or box should be made of 2 x 6 inch stuff, the sides and 
bottom 16 feet long and the ends 3 feet wide. This 
makes a box the inside dimensions of which are 3 feet 
by 15 feet 4 inches (3'x 15' 4") and 4 inches deep. The 
six posts should be 4" x 4" and 2' 6" high, and beveled 
off at the top so as to shed water and prevent the sharp 




Fig. 14. Open shed and feed storage combined. In use by E. E. 
Chester, Champaign Co., 111. 

corners injuring the cattle. The cross ties under the 
feed box should be 1" x 6", and long enough to reach 
across. The ties running lengthwise, instead of being 
crossed as shown in the accompanying cut should be 
2" x 6" x 16', extending straight along the side of the 
bunk. 

After the bunk is made it should be turned over and 
two-by-fours nailed to the bottom of the posts, allowing 
them to project six inches past the sides of the post on 
each side. The floors should then be placed in posHion, 



THE PAVED LOT 145 

about three feet apart, and the bunk set upon them. 
The bunk is secured to the floors by boring a hole through 
the two-by-four on the bottom of the posts and on 
through the floor, and dropping in an old bolt, which 
prevents the bunk and floors from being pushed out of 
place. Three bunks of the dimensions given will be 
enough to accommodate fifty cattle. The bunks 
should be arranged in a row. This is a great convenience 
in feeding, and cattle so fed are not running from one 
bunk to another, dropping feed as they go. These 
floors keep the feeder and the cattle out of the mud, and 
all droppings or waste feed fall upon them and the hogs 
have a chance to get it before it is lost in the mud. 

THE PAVED LOT; HOW TO MAKE AND USE IT 

The question of feed lot conditions has not received 
the consideration at the hands of cattle feeders that its 
importance merits. Perhaps the most neglected fac- 
tor is the surface of the yards or lots in which cattle are 
fed during the winter months. The importance of this 
subject is emphasized by the statement of a prominent 
cattle buyer at a leading market, who said, "You 
can tell the farmers and feeders of this country that in 
feeding cattle there is nothing more certain than that 
dirty hides from allowing cattle to wallow in mud or 
manure is sure to make a big loss, no matter how well 
bred or well fed the cattle may be. I visited the farm 
of a man who has fed market toppers and international 
prize winners, who allowed his cattle to stand in manure 
knee deep. Nevertheless, cattle with manure-covered 
hides will have to sell 10 to 15 cents and sometimes 25 
cents per hundredweight less than those with clean 
hides." The same authority stated that with yards in 
which the steers could be kept clean, gains could be put 
on with much less feed than where the cattle were com- 
pelled to wade about in the mud. The Illinois Experi- 
ment Station has conducted some experiments which 
furnish some data on these two important points. First, 



146 BEEF PRODUCTION 

as to the relative selling qualities of cattle kept clean and 
those fed in muddy lots. In the six months extending 
from Nov. 28, 1903, to June 1, 1904, the Experiment 
Station referred to fed a carload of choice 2-year-old 
steers on a paved lot and another carload of the same 
grade of steers in an ordinary mud lot. Of course both 
lots were fed the same ration, and all conditions, save the 
matter of the surface of the feed lot, were the same. 
When marketed in Chicago the steers fed in the mud 




Fig. 15. Bunk in which to feed grain to cattle, with platform 
approach. In use by J. R. Fulkerson, Jerseyville, 111. 

lot sold for 10 cents per hundredweight less than those 
having access to the paved lot. This was due to their 
dirty appearance and not to any inferiority of finish 
which they possessed, for strange as it may seem, the 
paved lot did not seem to make it possible to make larger 
or cheaper gains, considering the steers by themselves. 
The pigs following the steers having access to the paved 
lot, however, made nearly one pound more of pork per 
bushel of corn fed the steers than did those following the 
steers fed in the ordinary mud lot. In other words, 
while the pork produced by the pigs following the "mud 
lot steers'' paid for only 12.86 per cent of the total feed 
fed to steers, the pigs following the "paved lot steers" 
paid for 16.67 per cent. 



THE PAVED LOT 147 

There seems to be good reason why the mud lot steers 
made as good and as cheap gains as did those in the 
paved lots. Those in the mud lot had access at all times 
to an open shed, the bedding in which was kept dry at 
all times. This shed was large enough for all the steers 
in the lot to lie down at the same time. The feed bunk 
in which the corn was feci was only about 15 feet from 
the shed and the water tank about 20 feet. The weather 
was such that the mud lot was not in bad condition any 
very large part of the time. It was observed, too, that 
the steers in the mud lot spent much more time in the 
shed than did the lot of steers having access to the 
paved lot of the same size. In other words, the mud lot 
steers were not obliged to wade or stand in the mud to 
any considerable extent. Steers subjected to a mud 
lot with no suitable place to lie down must suffer, and 
when a steer is uncomfortable he is not making gain 
economically. In the experiment cited where conditions 
were as favorable for mud lot cattle feeding as could be 
expected, the falling off in pork produced is no incon- 
siderable item, amounting to $1.50 per steer, with pork 
at $6 per cwt. The writer believes that cattle will not 
drink as much water as they require if obliged to wade 
through deep mud to get it. The possibility of saving 
a large part of the manure by the use of the paved lot 
should be a strong argument in its favor. Paving with 
brick is not, of course, the only way to keep cattle out 
of the mud, but it is one way which gives promise of per- 
manency although expensive at the start. 

HOW TO PAVE THE FEED LOT 

The grade should be established slightly above the 
surrounding surface level to prevent any surface water 
from flowing onto the pavement. The slope given to the 
pavement will depend upon its location in reference to 
sheds, other lots, and natural or artificial drainage. 
The paved lots at the Illinois Experiment Station have 
a fall of 1 inch to 6 feet away from the open sheds. There 



148 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



is also a side slope to each lot with a tile at the lowest 
corner to carry off surface rain water that falls on the 
pavement. As the pavement is frequently cleaned 
there is no serious leaching of manure. 

After the proper grade had been secured the ground 
was covered with 6 inches of gravel, which was rolled 
and tamped down solid, covered with 1 inch of fine sand 
upon which No. 1 paving brick was laid flat, herring- 




^^^gg'g^^^ ^^^ Gaze* UioFlat 

D n r- GftOUMD 

Brick Pavement of Feed Lot 

a section through ab ground plan 




BhickFiat 



Floor of Pavement 

Fig. 16. 



bone pattern, except in the alley and around the scales, 
where they were placed on edge. After being put in 
place, the bricks were rolled down even, and upon in- 
spection, if any were found to be soft they were replaced 
with good ones. 

The space between the bricks was filled with a grout 
"filler" consisting of one part clean, sharp sand and one 
part of Portland cement. The cement and sand were 
thoroughly mixed dry in tight boxes, then made into 
a mortar of the consistency of cream and thoroughly 
broomed into the joints. The slushing was repeated 
to insure the filling of all cracks or joints between the 



THE SELF-FEEDER 149 

bricks. This was clone to keep the water from getting 
underneath the pavement which, if allowed to enter, 
would soften the subgrade or cause the heaving of the 
bricks by alternate freezing and thawing. 

The cement filler was allowed to set a week before 
heavy loads were driven on it, and as the work was 
done in summer, the sun's rays were kept off by means 
of a canvas for the first clay. A retaining curb of 2 x 8 
plank, braced by a 4 x 4, placed 23^ feet in the ground, 
was put in at the gates to keep the animals from break- 
ing the edge of the brick. 

The writer has seen pavement thus constructed that 
has been in use for nine years and is still in good 
condition. 

THE SELF-FEEDER; HOW TO MAKE AND USE IT 

The self-feeder, or feeder as it is sometimes called, is 
a feed box so arranged that it will hold a considerable 
quantity of concentrated feed, a portion of which is ac- 
cessible to the cattle at all times. 

No records are available touching upon the question 
of when and with what class of live stock it was first 
used. However, it is no new system of feeding for it 
has been in use for a considerable number of years. 

The extent to which the self-feeder has been used has 
varied much, its use in some localities being quite gen- 
eral, and in others scarcely known at all. 

HOW TO MAKE A SELF-FEEDER 

The plan and construction of the self-feeder will, of 
course, depend largely upon the nature of the feed which 
is to be fed through it to fattening cattle. In the corn- 
belt, and in fact wherever beef cattle are extensively fed 
in the United States, corn in some form is the principal 
concentrate used. Corn has been successfully fed to 
cattle in self-feeders in the following forms: broken 
ear, shelled, crushed, corn and cob meal, and corn meal. 
As indicated above, it is necessary to make minor alter- 



150 BEEF PRODUCTION 

ations in the feeder to permit the corn in these various 
forms to feed down properly. The essentials of a good 
self-feeder are as follows: 

Storage for sufficient feed for the cattle having access 
to the self-feeder for several days should be provided. 
The opening from the storage compartment of the feeder 




Fig. 17. A small Self-Feeder. 

to the trough should be capable of such adjustment that 
the feed should at all times be available to the cattle. 
That is to say, it should not be so constructed that the 
cattle have access to large quantities of the feed at any 
one time, as this occasions considerable waste of feed and 
loss of appetite of the cattle by their slobbering and 
mussing over it until it is unpalatable. Unless this fea- 
ture of the feeder receives careful attention and adjust- 
ment the self-feeder will prove more or less unsatisfac- 
tory. A construction which makes it necessary for the 



THE SELF-FEEDER 151 

cattle to work a little to get the feed is desirable. Where 
feeds and their preparation are varied from year to year 
it is not an easy matter always to have the self-feeder 
working in the most satisfactory manner. In a number 
of instances it has been necessary for the cattle feeder 
to visit his cattle daily to examine the feeder and see 
that it is working properly. It may be argued that if in 
the use of the self-feeder it becomes necessary to see the 
cattle daily the claimed advantage of the use of the self- 
feeder as a labor saver is unwarranted. To a certain 
extent this is true, but whether the self-feeder is used or 
not there is force in the old adage, "The eye of the 
master fattens his cattle," and the wise cattle feeder will 
plan to see his fattening cattle frequently. 

TROUGH SHOULD BE LOXG 

Another desirable feature in the self-feeder which 
should be provided for is that the trough out of which 
the cattle secure their feed should be sufficiently long 
to accommodate, at the same time, practically all 
of the cattle having access to it. The dimensions of 
the self-feeder should therefore be determined by the 
number of cattle to be fed. There is no one type of self- 
feeder that is better than all others; indeed the type of 
feeder should vary according to where and how it is to 
be used. The main thing is to see that the essentials 
of a self-feeder, enumerated elsewhere, are observed. 
Some cattle feeders have so planned their sheds or barns 
that the self-feeder is located along one side or through 
the center of such building. Others have made the 
self-feeder a part of their storage cribs for corn. The 
self-feeder here described will accommodate ten to twelve 
cattle weighing from 900 to 1400 pounds each. It is 
designed to use in the open field or in the pasture for 
summer feeding. It may be placed on posts set in the 
ground or it may have a base built as a part of the self- 
feeder. There is an advantage in having several small 
self-feeders over one large one where a large number of 



152 BEEF PRODUCTION 

cattle are to be accommodated, viz., the smaller feeders 
can be moved when it becomes muddy about the feeder 
and where occasion requires they can, if built strong 
enough, be moved from one field to another. The 
height of the floor of the feed trough should be from 
twenty-four to thirty inches, depending upon the age 
and size of the cattle fed. 

By referring to the sketch (Figure 17 and 17A), it 
will be seen that the outside dimensions of the box for 
storage of feed are 12 feet 2 inches long, 5 feet 6 inches 
high, and 4 feet 4 inches broad. This box or storage 
bin has a capacity of approximately 180 bushels. The 
detailed drawing, or sketch, will show the construction 
of the hopper bottom, feed troughs, roof, door, etc. 
The drawing does not correctly illustrate that the hop- 
per bottom of the storage bin lacks four inches of com- 
ing out flush with the wall of the bin and that the open- 
ing left for feed to feed out of the hopper into feed troughs 
is two and one-half inches wide. This width of the 
opening and pitch of the bottom of bin should vary with 
the kind of feed to be used. That is, if broken corn is 
used a much wider opening will be required; if shelled 
corn, a narrower one. The opening left in this case was 
for feeding meal. Six-inch flooring was used for the 
sides and floor. A shingle roof is of course unneces- 
sary, but was used in this case, the shingles being laid 
four inches to the weather. 

BILL OF MATERIAL NECESSARY 

The following is a bill of materials necessary to build 
the feeder, as illustrated: 

Seventeen pieces 2x4, 16 feet; six pieces 2x6, 16 feet 
one piece 2x6, 8 feet; twenty-four pieces 1x4, 16 feet 
two pieces 6x6, 12 feet; thirty pieces 1x6, 12 feet 
one piece 6 x 8, 18 feet; 1700 shingles. 

Nails, paint, and labor, together with the materials 
itemized, make this feeder cost from $30 to $35, depend- 
ing upon the grade and price of materials used. In 



THE SELF-FEEDER 



153 



« 


"» 




































t»"» 


« 7 .j 






nz 

'u 


I 


~ j 


* l 


- i 












-___.j__ 




■ 






**£ 


t .T/* 








7 










bjD 






154 BEEF PRODUCTION 

all that has been said concerning the use and construc- 
tion of the self-feeder with fattening cattle, the writer 
does not wish to be understood as especially favoring 
its use. We do wish to say, however, that where proper- 
ly constructed and judiciously used and where for var- 
ious reasons its use seems desirable, it may be used to 
good advantage. Where its proper use in the economy 
of cattle feeding is understood, it is not necessarily a 
wasteful or hazardous method of finishing cattle. It 
is not, however, a device that can be advantageous- 
ly or even safely used by those who are inexperienced 
or who fail to familiarize themselves with its limitations. 

HOW TO USE THE SELF-FEEDER 

It has generally been considered that the chief point 
of advantage of this system of feeding is the economiz- 
ing of labor. While this item is frequently an impor- 
tant one, it is by no means the only advantage following 
the use of the self-feeder in fattening cattle. Another 
is suggested in a statement of a prominent and success- 
ful Illinois cattle feeder, viz.: "It is more reliable than 
a careless man and more economical of labor than even 
a careful man." 

WHAT FEEDERS THINK OF IT 

A brief consideration of some of the advantages and 
disadvantages of its use forms a good basis for discus- 
sion of this subject. A few statements representative 
of those who name disadvantages of this method of 
feeding are quoted below from circular 98 of the Illinois 
Experiment Station : 

"It cannot be safely used to start cattle on feed." 
This is in substance the reply made by several feeders, 
most of whom use the self-feeder, but who do not turn 
the cattle to it until they are accustomed to a liberal 
grain ration. Bad results following the use of the self- 
feeder have invariably occurred where proper care has 
not been exercised in getting the cattle on full feed 



THE SELF-FEEDER 155 

before turning them to the feeder. In the opinion of the 
writer the place to use the self-feeder is with long fed 
cattle — that is, cattle that have been fed corn liberally 
from three to four months. 

"Cattle do not eat regularly." The following replies 
also bear upon this point: " Cattle eat more than they 
will assimilate." "It is like a man eating at all times; 
he soon regrets it." "Cattle glut themselves." "Cattle 
have too much feed at the start; therefore get off feed 
more easily." "Had four steers foundered last year." 
It should be added that with the exception of the 
one last mentioned these statements are made by men 
who are not using the self-feeder and do not mention 
ever having used it. 

"Cattle lose their appetite sooner than by hand feed- 
ing." "Prefer to have steers get hungry." "Like to 
have cattle clean up feed every day." "Slobber over 
corn and do not eat it so well." "Cannot mix oil meal, 
bran, etc., to good advantage." "Cattle need variety 
of feed." "To give this I feed in bunks once a day in 
addition to self-feeder." "Eat less, gain less." "Cattle 
should clean up feed an hour after every feed." 

"The tendency is to neglect cattle." "Cattle are not 
watched closely enough." "Cattle are not so gentle." 
"The best self-feeder is the man who has his money in 
the cattle." 

"Cattle waste feed by licking out and slobbering over 
it." "I use it when corn is not too high." "Opening 
gets clogged, due to damp weather or slobbering of 
cattle." "Damp weather causes feed to become lumpy 
or stale." 

CATTLE WILL EAT AS THEY REQUIRE 

Considering these objections a little more in detail, 
it may be said that where a judicious use of the self- 
feeder is made cattle will eat as they require. They 
may or may not eat regularly, but in our experience 
they make their visits to the self-feeder with remarkable 



156 BEEF PRODUCTION 

regularity. If, previous to being turned to the self- 
feeder, the cattle have been worked up to a maximum 
grain ration slowly and gradually, they will not con- 
sume an excessive amount of concentrates, and it is 
doubted whether under such conditions they will eat so 
much that they will fail to assimilate a normal amount 
of what they consume. Cattle eating too much and 
getting foundered when turned to the self-feeder comes 
from attempting to get the cattle on the self-feeder too 
quickly. 

Cattle will undoubtedly eat more where the self-feeder 
is used than where it is not. They will also usually make 
greater gains in the former than in the latter instance. 
Experiments indicate, however, that under the most 
favorable circumstances for the use of the self-feeder, it 
requires slightly more feed to produce a given gain than 
where cattle are intelligently fed at regular intervals 
according to the common practice. This difference 
under favorable conditions is so slight that it could not 
be said to be a strong argument against the use of the 
self-feeder. The larger consumption of feed and greater 
gains undoubtedly tend to shorten the period of profita- 
ble full feeding. 

Almost all concentrated feeds and mixtures have 
been successfully used in self-feeders. Undoubtedly 
this system of feeding has appealed strongest to the 
careless and indifferent cattle feeders, who are persist- 
ently seeking methods that require little effort on their 
part, and, as a consequence, many careless cattle feeders 
have employed this method and have condemned its 
use because they have not understood and heeded its 
limitations. 

DOES NOT PERMIT OF WASTE 

Some of the objections raised may be disposed of 
by saying that a properly constructed self-feeder does 
not permit the cattle to muss and slobber over any con- 
siderable quantity of the feed. 



THE SELF-FEEDER 157 

Before leaving this subject I wish to call attention 
to the possibility of using the self-feeder to advantage 
from the start. This may be accomplished by chaffing 
or cutting the roughage and mingling it with the con- 
centrate fed before delivering the feed to the self-feeder. 
By mixing a large proportion of roughage with the con- 
centrates fed at the beginning, the cattle may be safely 
turned to the feeder as soon as they are received from 
the market or as soon as they are placed in the feed lot. 
As the feeding progresses, the proportion of roughage 
should be reduced as the concentrates are increased. 
By actual trial this has proved a very good system for 
short fed cattle, and, as far as the writer's knowledge ex- 
tends, the very safest method of getting cattle on feed 
quickly. This has been fully explained in a preceding 
chapter. 



PART II. 

BREEDING BEEF CATTLE FOR THE MARKET 



CHAPTER XXII. 

BREEDING FOR BEEF 

The percentage of the total number of farmers in the 
United States who are specialists has never been deter- 
mined, and while there is undoubtedly a tendency toward 
increasing this percentage, it is still sufficiently small 
to call for comment. Excepting those, of course, who 
are making a specialty of producing feeding cattle, there 
are very few specialists who breed beef calves. But 
among the so-called general farmers there are very few 
indeed, who do not breed a few calves each year, which, 
if not fattened for market or home consumption by the 
producer, ultimately find their way into the hands of 
cattle feeders who make a business of fattening or fin- 
ishing cattle for the market. 

If the question were asked, "How general is the in- 
terest in breeding beef cattle throughout the United 
States?" the answer would be unhesitatingly that in- 
terest in this subject is confined to the West and South- 
west. More thoughtful consideration of the subject 
will, however, reveal some interesting facts. 

Cattle from the range country are a conspicuous fac- 
tor in our fat cattle and feeding cattle markets ; so much 
so, indeed, that there is some danger of the native sup- 
plies being overlooked. The multitude of men who 
produce a few head each furnish a supply, which, in the 
aggregate, form a very considerable factor in our leading 

158 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 159 

markets. It is true that each small producer has no 
identity nor is by himself to be considered an important 
factor in the production of the world's supply of beef, 
or, in other words, he or even a large number of such 
producers could discontinue their small operations with- 
out its producing even a ripple in the market. It is not 
from the standpoint of the influence of such individuals 
upon the market that this subject is to be discussed, but 
rather from the standpoint of these small producers, who, 
in the opinion of the writer, will become more, rather 
than less, numerous, and hence constitute a more impor- 
tant factor in the meat trade. We have shown how a 
very large number of farmers are producers of beef cat- 
tle, and while a large percentage produce only a few 
head each year, those few head must of necessity be 
either profitable or unprofitable to them. They must 
consume farm products which should be consumed by 
cattle which will pay the highest market prices for them. 
Well-bred cattle of the beef type only will do this if the 
primary object in view is the production of beef. If 
combined beef and milk is the object sought, then the 
dual purpose type should be selected. It is the purpose 
to discuss at this point the question of breeding cattle 
where beef production is the primary object, leaving for 
a subsequent discussion the question of the dual purpose 
cow in her relation to beef production. 

SELECTION OF COWS AND HEIFERS 

Undoubtedly the selection of the bull to head a herd 
is of much greater importance than the selection of the 
females composing the herd. However, it has seemed 
to the writer that not enough importance is attached to 
the selection of the cows. While good steers may result 
from mating common cows with a well-bred beef bull, 
better ones are secured from well-bred cows, and there 
are fewer common steers resulting from such a mating. 

If common cows are used, common steers will surely 
be bred all too frequently. It should therefore be the 



160 BEEF PRODUCTION 

policy of the breeder of market beef cattle to use high- 
grade cows of some one of the beef breeds. The owners 
of herds of scrub or common cows may accomplish this 
end either by selling out and purchasing high-grade 
females or by grading up from the cows already on hand 
by successive crosses of beef bulls of approved merit. 
Where the financial circumstances of the breeder will 
permit of the former plan it is unquestionably the most 
rapid and satisfactory means of arriving at the end 
sought. Whether Herefords, Aberdeen-Angus, Short- 
horns, Galloways, or Polled Durhams should be selected 
will depend upon the breeder's personal preference and 
the conditions which prevail. Good individuals of any 
of these breeds if properly mated will give satisfactory 
returns. Each breed has its peculiar advantages and 
when these are understood and recognized there exist 
good arguments in favor of each. The Herefords are 
excellent grazers and mature early. The Aberdeen- 
Angus produce high quality of beef and are much sought 
in our markets as fat cattle. Their hornless character 
recommends them to those desiring a polled race. The 
Shorthorns nick well with common cattle and other beef 
breeds. They are widely distributed, easily available, 
and quiet in disposition. Galloways are hardy and pro- 
duce high quality of beef. They are hornless. The 
Polled Durhams resemble the Shorthorns in appearance 
and characteristics and are preferred to Shorthorns by 
some because of their being polled. As has been stated, 
high grades of any of these breeds will prove satisfactory; 
however, they have characteristic differences in form 
and development which render it advisable not to have 
the cow stock partly of one breed and partly of another. 
In the interest of uniformity all should be grades of the 
same breed. It is not so important to select a particular 
breed as to secure choice individuals of whatever breed 
seems most desirable under the circumstances. The 
fact that a cow or heifer is a high grade of some one of 
the beef breeds does not in itself insure satisfactory qual- 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 



161 



i^ 






bfi 



< 
o 

o 

bfi 



162 BEEF PRODUCTION 

ity. There is a wide difference in individuality between 
different animals of the same breed. The matter of 
selection of individuals within a breed may thus become 
a more important matter than the selection of a breed. 
Select as far as possible females which conform to the 
standard of excellence of the breed. If this is accom- 
plished it will insure a uniformity in type that is highly 
desirable. If in addition to this it is possible to select 
cows and heifers that are similarly bred, they will be 
more likely to produce uniformity in their offspring and 
a uniform lot of stockers, feeders, or fat cattle sell for 
more than an uneven lot. 

There are a few general considerations in selecting 
beef cows which should be mentioned, such as form, 
quality, and constitution. The main characteristics 
to be sought in form are shortness of leg, breadth, 
and a general smoothness, good top and underlines, full 
flanks, and straight legs. The bone, head, and hair 
should indicate quality as opposed to coarseness on the 
one hand or delicacy on the other. A good constitution 
is evidenced by a broad, deep chest, a good heart girth, 
and a lively condition of the coat of hair. 

SELECTION AND USE OF BULLS 

There is perhaps no other important factor connected 
with beef production that is as often disregarded as that 
of the selection of bulls to head the herds of grade 
cows from which are produced the feeding cattle of the 
country. The importance of this item can not be gener- 
ally recognized, for, if it were, there would be a strong 
demand at good prices for every good pure-bred bull of 
the beef breeds that is offered for sale. As it is, there 
are many good bulls that breeders are obliged to sell at 
prices which render the breeding of pedigreed beef cattle 
by no means the most remunerative of enterprises. It 
is still true that "the bull is half the herd," and he may 
be more than half the herd if he is a choice individual 
backed up by good ancestry. A brief discussion of the 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 163 

importance of the selection of a sire should tend to a 
more active demand for the better grades of registered 
beef bulls. In the first place, the writer wishes to go 
on record as saying that the breeder of feeding cattle, 
whether he fattens them himself or sells them to cattle 
feeders, can not afford to use a common bull of indis- 
criminate breeding. There can be no doubt about that. 
Feeding cattle that are well-bred and possess quality 
enough to weigh one thousand pounds or better at two 
years old are worth all the way from $40 to $50 per head, 
depending upon their individual quality and condition. 
Such feeding cattle can be and are produced from grade 
beef cows mated with choice registered beef bulls. Com- 
mon and inferior feeding cattle that are produced from 
common cows and scrub or grade bulls frequently attain 
an age of three or more years before they reach one thou- 
sand pounds in weight. Such feeders at such an age and 
weight are worth from $27 to $30 each. The lesson 
should be plain that it does not pay to use an inferior 
bull that sires the steer that pays the owner but $9 per 
year for his keep as against the one that pays $22 to $25 
per year. It may be claimed that the fault is not alto- 
gether with the bull. We grant that. But suppose the 
cows are the same in either case, the well-bred beef bull 
will produce feeding cattle which will grade at least two 
grades higher than the feeding cattle produced by the 
mediocre bull. There is usually about thirty-five cents 
per hundredweight difference in price between one grade 
of feeding cattle and the next higher. If the well-bred 
bull raises the grade of his offspring two grades, he adds 
to the value of each animal he sires seventy cents per 
hundredweight or to the one thousand pound steer seven 
dollars. Properly cared for, a bull should sire from forty 
to fifty calves in a year. For sake of argument, suppose 
we say he sires forty. If he should increase the value 
of each of his offspring but $5, a very conservative esti- 
mate, he earns at the least $200, with his first crop of 
calves. At the present time, there are plenty of regis- 



164 BEEF PRODUCTION 

tered beef bulls of the various beef breeds that are well 
calculated to sire choice to fancy feeding cattle that can 
be purchased at from $100 to $200 each. It is no exag- 
geration to say that as compared with the use of an 
inferior bull the registered beef bull pays for himself the 
first year. The most hopeful condition surrounding the 
production of beef cattle to-day in the United States is 
the supply of choice bulls that can be secured at relatively 
low cost. There is, however, in this a danger to the 
future of beef cattle interests in this country. Breeders 
of choice registered beef bulls can not long afford to sell 
the kind that will produce high class beef steers at prices 
at which certain beef producers insist upon buying them. 
We have inferred that the bull selected should be 
pure-bred and that his ancestry should be of the best. 
We would insist upon this as the only reasonably sure 
way of insuring beef excellence in his offspring. Not 
only should a high standard of individual excellence be 
demanded in the ancestry of a bull, but attention should 
also be given to their records as producers of stock of 
high quality. If one is familiar with the methods of the 
breeders of the ancestry, the pedigree may also be an 
indication of the conditions under which the bull and 
his ancestors have been developed. The breeder and 
his methods should be taken into consideration as well 
as the appearance of the cattle. Many pampered bulls 
prove disappointing when put to the actual test of 
heading a herd of beef cows. It is always assumed that 
a good individual possessing the type and characteristics 
of a beef sire should be selected. These points have been 
so frequently described that extended notice of them 
here is unnecessary. However, there are some points 
which should receive especial consideration, viz., con- 
stitution, quality, character, and masculinity. These 
points while difficult to define are quickly recognized 
by the practiced eye of the experienced cattleman. 
Some lack of breed, type, or character may be sacrificed 
in a steer breeding bull provided their absence is not 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 165 

attended with an absence of qualities which make for 
the production of a more profitable feeder's type. 
Calves and yearlings are frequently purchased as sires 
because they can usually be purchased for fewer dollars 
per head or because their period of usefulness is likely 
to be longer, or, perhaps, it may be because the young 
bull in full flesh looks better. It is a mistake to discrim- 
inate against an aged bull that has proved himself a 
valuable sire. 

MANAGEMENT OF THE BULL 

Breeders differ in their opinion as to whether the 
bull should be allowed to run with the cows. The 
writer believes it advisable to keep the bull by himself 
in a well fenced pasture lot provided with shade and 
shelter. If it can be made sufficiently large to furnish 
ample pasture for the bull, so much the better. By 
keeping the bull confined and breeding the cows as they 
come in season it is possible to keep a record of when 
the cows will calve. A bull so handled can also serve a 
larger number of cows during the year. The number of 
cows which a bull should cover in a year will depend 
upon his age, condition, and treatment, together with 
the distribution of the cows bred to him. The number 
should vary from thirty to sixty in a year. 

The feed of the herd bull should be nourishing, but 
not too concentrated or heating. The best of roughage 
in the way of clover hay or alfalfa and silage or roots 
should be used. A small percentage of corn with a 
large percentage of oats and bran constitutes a satis- 
factory ration. The amount to be fed will vary accord- 
ing to the age, weight, and condition of the bull as well 
as the work required of him. He should be kept in 
good, thrifty condition, a,nd if it is found that it requires 
an abnormal amount of feed to maintain this condition, 
in other words, that the bull is a "hard-keeper," he is 
not well calculated to sire cattle possessing good feeding 
qualities, and should be replaced. 



166 BEEF PRODUCTION 

CARE AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HERD 

There are numerous details in the care and manage- 
ment which are matters of local interest, and these can 
not well be considered in this discussion. Such general 
questions, however, as the best season to have calves 
dropped, the age at which to breed heifers, and the best 
age to dispose of females are points worthy of careful 
consideration. 

WHEN TO HAVE CALVES DROPPED 

The consensus of opinion is that, everything con- 
sidered, it is best to breed the cows so they will calve 
during the spring season. The arguments in favor of this 
system are that the cows may be wintered cheaper 
when not in milk with calves at foot. They require 
less room for shelter, less careful attention from the 
attendant, and less protection from the cold. If the 
calves are dropped in the fall it is hardly possible to 
finish them without carrying through two winters, 
whereas, if dropped in the spring, they need not be 
wintered but once, being finished at the age of eighteen 
to twenty months. If, too, the cattle are marketed at 
the ages noted, they will have the benefit of two summers 
of grass, whereas when dropped during the fall season, 
in order to get the benefit of two seasons of grass, they 
must be carried until they are from twenty-four to 
twenty-six months of age. On the contrary, it is ar- 
gued by some who favor the fall calf, that a better animal 
can be produced and developed by this system, because 
the cow in the fall is in better physical condition to 
deliver her calf after a period of summering on pasture; 
that the cow's flow of milk, which has freshened in the 
fall, will be getting limited by the time she goes to grass 
and the grass will have a tendency to produce a more 
abundant supply for the calf; that the calf at that age 
and time is better able to handle pasture grasses to an 
advantage than when younger, and to endure heat and 
the fly season more easily. There is undoubtedly force 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 167 

in some of these arguments, but the writer believes the 
advantages of the spring calf outweigh those of the fall 
calf, with reference to the growing of cattle for beef in 
the corn-belt. 

BREED CALVES UNIFORM IN AGE 

Care should be taken to breed the cows in such a 
way that the calves will be as nearly uniform in age as 
possible. This will necessitate the weeding out of the 
herd cows which persist in coming in season only after 
long periods have elapsed after calving. Such cows 
are not necessarily shy breeders, but, for the reason 
stated, should be discarded. The margin of profit in 
breeding beef cattle is so slight that the producer can 
not long afford to board the shy breeder. 

The herd should be frequently and carefully culled. 
The basis of selection or standard of excellence after 
the individuals have been tested should not be alone 
their conformity to score card standards of form and 
condition, but primarily their records as breeders. It 
sometimes happens that some of the plainest looking 
cows are the best producers. These should most 
certainly be reserved for future use even though they 
are not pleasing to look upon. 

AGE TO BREED HEIFERS 

The question is often asked, "At what age should 
heifers be bred?" Assuming that heifers have been 
liberally fed and have attained normal size for their age, 
they may very properly be bred at from eighteen to 
twenty months of age. In case the heifers are under- 
sized and lacking in development and condition, the 
breeding may be postponed for another six months. It 
ought not to be necessary, however, to keep a heifer 
until she is two years of age, or upwards, before breeding. 
Lmdoubtedly, many of the most satisfactory breeding 
cows will be found among those that have reached six 
to nine years, and in general it is bad practice to discard 



168 BEEF PRODUCTION 

an especially good breeder at such age simply because 
she will deteriorate in value if kept longer. On the 
other hand, the necessity of watching every corner to 
avoid unnecessary losses leads to the conclusion that 
females should be replaced with younger stock before 
they have deteriorated materially in value. This usu- 
ally means that cows should be sold when in good con- 
dition at eight years of age or even younger, but should 
by no means be applied to those which have proved 
regular and prepotent producers of satisfactory calves. 

Male calves should be castrated before the calf has 
reached an age of three months, and this may be done 
when the calf is less than one week old. 

The feeding of a herd of cattle maintained for the 
purpose of breeding calves intended for developing into 
beef may best be considered under the general divisions 
of (a) summer and (b) winter feeding. 

SUMMER FEEDING 

If pasture is of good quality and abundant the cows 
and calves will require but very little attention during 
the pasturing season. The calves should be weaned at 
from six to eight months of age. If spring calves only 
are produced and the cows are provided with an abun- 
dance of pasture, there will be no need of supplementing 
the pasture with concentrated feeds as far as the cow is 
concerned. If, however, pastures are sufficiently short 
materially to affect the milk flow of the cow, the pasture 
should be supplemented with silage, clover or alfalfa 
hay, green forage, or concentrated feeds. The calves 
should be taught to eat grain before being weaned to 
prevent shrinkage at weaning time. 

Cows and calves at pasture should have access at all 
times to fresh, pure water, shade, and salt. 

The question of winter feeding of breeding cows 
requires separate treatment. 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 169 

WINTER FEEDING OF BEEF BREEDING COWS 

The kinds and amounts of feeds used in the winter 
feeding of beef breeding cows should be governed to a 
large extent by the condition of the cows when they go 
into winter quarters. The character of the shelter best 
adapted for cows will be determined by the condition 
of the cows and the feed which they receive. 

With the factors mentioned, more or less dependent 
upon each other, it is necessary, in order to discuss this 
subject intelligently, to assume certain conditions. 
These assumed conditions will in most instances be 
those which are most commonly met with, or those which 
the writer believes to be most characteristic. 

It is assumed that the climate and other conditions 
necessitate dry lot feeding and some provision for shelter 
for five to six months. 

The end sought in the feeding and management of a 
herd of beef breeding cows is, of course, to maintain 
them in such thrift and flesh as will render them best 
able to give birth to and suckle well their offspring, with 
as small an expenditure of expensive feeds as possible. 
That is to say, the cattle raiser, on the one hand, can not 
afford to maintain such a herd largely on concentrated 
feeds having relatively high market value to insure 
desirable condition, nor, on the other hand, can he afford 
to so stint the amount or quality of feeds that they are 
so emaciated and weak as to give birth to delicate calves, 
which they can scarcely nourish on account of their in- 
sufficient flow of milk. 

Cows used for this purpose should be dehorned or 
natural polls, as they can thus be run in large droves 
and cared for much more economically than can horned 
cows. If dehorned, a considerable number of them will 
run together quietly; and if calves are dropped in the 
spring, except in the most northern climates, the cows 
will require no other shelter than a shed open to the 
south. Such cows should go into winter quarters in 
good, thrifty condition after weaning their calves. By 



170 BEEF PRODUCTION 

good, thrifty condition we mean the condition in which 
the animal is fleshy but not fat, about as fleshy as they 
would be expected to go on grass the following spring. 
With this condition to start with, the feeder has simply 
to maintain that weight, or better, keep them gaining 
slightly, through the season. This gain should always 
be slightly more than sufficient to account for the growth 
and weight of the foetus. 

We would brand as gross mismanagement the prac- 
tice of premitting the cows to run down in noticeably 
thin flesh, making it necessary to feed lavishly during 
part of the season to regain flesh lost during a corres- 
ponding season of neglect. The most satisfactory 
results in breeding and rearing calves and, we believe, 
the most economical system of maintenance of such 
herds, involves the keeping of the cows composing the 
herd in good, thrifty condition throughout all the year. 

The proper feeding of such a herd during the winter 
season is frequently looked upon as expensive. This 
does not necessarily follow. Such a herd should be 
maintained largely upon cheap roughages, some at 
least of which are unsalable. The roughages will vary 
in different localities, and the varieties used should be 
governed very largely by their availability. 

Where corn silage is available, it is undoubtedly one 
of the very best feeds to use as the principal part of the 
winter ration of beef breeding cows. It is neither 
necessary nor advisable to feed to such cows all they will 
eat, but rather limit the amount to a medium ration of 
silage and supplement it with clover hay and other 
roughage such as straw or corn stover. A ration com- 
posed of eighteen pounds of silage and four pounds 
of clover hay per 1000-lb. cow per day, together with 
all the straw the cows will eat, will not only keep 
cows from losing in weight during the winter season, 
but will cause them to gain at the rate of from one to 
one and a quarter pounds per head per day. If silage is 
not available, a daily ration of ten pounds of shock corn, 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 171 

four pounds of clover hay, and all the straw the cows 
will take will winter them satisfactorily, but not as well 
as the silage ration to which we have referred. 

Beef breeding cows may be wintered on corn stover 
and straw, supplemented with a limited amount (two 
pounds per day per thousand pounds live weight) of 
clover hay. This ration contains no grain, and, while 
cows may be maintained on it at less cost than the pre- 
vious rations, it will not prove economical for a series of 
years, because the thrift of the animals is not well main- 
tained nor their milk flow sustained. A small amount 
of grain in the ration is a matter of very great impor- 
tance. Wintering in stalk field with access to oat straw 
and open shed shelter is a suitable method of wintering, 
provided there is sufficient supply of grain in the field 
or added to the ration. 



CHAPTER XXIII. 

COST OF REARING CALVES ALLOWED TO 
NURSE THEIR DAMS 

The question, "What does it cost to raise a 450-lb. 
calf?" is one which has been raised a multitude of times 
in the minds of the beef producers of this country. 
It has been raised in the East, in the corn-belt, and on the 
range. It requires but a very superficial study of the 
subject to become convinced that the cost varies widely 
in different sections of the country and under different 
systems of management. It is not our purpose to 
discuss the cost of range-bred calves, but rather to discuss 
what are commonly spoken of as native calves. Nor is 
it our purpose at this time to attempt to show the cost 
of rearing skim-milk calves, but to confine this discussion 
to the cost of raising calves where cows of pronounced 
beef breeding are maintained solely for the calves which 
they produce, the latter being allowed to nurse the 
former. In other words, these beef-breeding cows are 
kept for the production and rearing of one calf each 
annually. 

Before attempting to itemize the cost of producing 
such calves, it will be well to discuss some of the con- 
ditions which affect such a statement. There are three 
principal conditions of circumstances which affect the 
cost of production of beef calves. They are : First, the 
market value of the land. Second, the natural adapta- 
bility of the land for cattle raising. Third, the grade of 
calves produced. The first and second items might at 
first thought appear to refer to about the same thing, but, 
as a matter of fact, they may introduce quite different 
conditions. For example, we can understand how some 
land valued at $50 per acre would be about as valuable 

172 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 173 

per acre for raising beef calves as other land valued at 
$100, or even more. In considering the question of the 
market value of the land in reference to the cost of pro- 
ducing calves, it is, therefore, necessary to know what 
makes the land valuable. If it is its exceptional adapta- 
bility for the production of beef, all well and good, but 
if its high value is due to its location, or its expensive 
equipment, these things, which may add greatly to the 
market value of the land, also materially add to the 
cost of rearing calves. Undoubtedly, there was a time 
when the market value of land in the corn-belt appre- 
ciated because of its discovered unusual possibilities for 
growing corn, which was almost exclusively used for 
live-stock production, and more particularly used for 
fattening cattle. In recent years, however, lands in the 
corn-belt have not risen in value primarily because of 
their ability to raise more corn, to feed more cattle, to 
buy more hogs, etc. Cattle feeding has become but an 
incident in the corn raising and marketing territory. 

As a result of these changing conditions, it is ob- 
served that cattle production is shifting from the high- 
priced corn-belt farms to the cheaper lands of the East, 
West, North, and South. Especially is this true of the 
raising of feeding cattle, a subject of which the present 
discussion forms an important part. High-priced corn- 
belt farms have long since ceased to possess advantages 
in cattle raising as distinct from cattle fattening. 

To intelligently discuss the cost of production of a 
beef calf it is necessary to assume that certain conditions 
obtain. It must be known, for example, that the land 
has a definite market value, upon which valuation it is 
reasonable to demand a fair interest. It must be as- 
sumed also that the land selected to illustrate the point 
in hand must be fairly well adapted for cattle raising. 
That is, it must produce satisfactorily a variety of 
grasses and clovers for pasture and hay, and corn, oats 
or other feeds suitable for the production of cattle. That 
is to say, whatever value the land possesses, the value 



174 BEEF PRODUCTION 

should rest in the land and not in its proximity to some 
city, town, or village, or as has been mentioned before, 
its value must not consist in expensive improvements 
that do not directly aid in cheapening the cost of pro- 
ducing cattle. 

Suppose, as an example, we assume the land to be 
worth $100 per acre and sufficiently fertile and so handled 
that it produces a calf to 6 months of age, including the 
keep of the dam, to each two acres. It would seem 
reasonable to charge 5 per cent on the investment in 
lands and 7 per cent interest on cattle. 

Another item which should receive some explanation 
is that of the grade of calves produced. It is assumed 
that only calves possessing a high percentage of beef 
blood are to be produced and that these calves possess 
the type and characteristics of well-bred beef calves. 
Calves of such breeding and permitted to nurse their 
dams should weigh from 400 to 450 pounds at six months 
of age. It is believed that a herd of cows properly 
handled should produce 85 per cent of calves annually, 
or to produce one calf would require 1.18 cows. Such 
cows would be valued at about $40 each. A suitable 
bull would cost approximately $150 and serve twenty- 
five cows. 

With these facts known it is possible to make the 
following itemized statement, which is intended to show 
the cost of production per calf : 

Five per cent interest on investment in two acres of 

$100 land and accompanying equipment $10.00 

Seven per cent interest on investment in 1.18 cows 

at $40 3.90 

Seven per cent interest on investment in one twenty- 
fifth of a $150 bull 42 

Cost of production of winter feed and pasture, exclu- 
sive of above charges 4 . 00 

Taxes and insurance on land and cattle, including 

necessary fencing repairs 3 . 00 

Annual depreciation on 1.18 cows at $2.00 2.36 



BREEDING BEEF CATTLE 175 

Pro rata depreciation on herd bull 80 

Four per cent mortality on valuation of stock and 

herd bull 2.13 

Total cost $26.61 

If the calf weighs 450 pounds, it has cost approxi- 
mately $6.00 per hundredweight. If it does not weigh 
that much it has cost more. 

Were such calves to be raised on land valued at $50 
instead of $100 per acre, which is not impossible, the 
cost of each calf could be reduced fully one-fifth. There 
are other items of expense which might under favorable 
conditions and the best practice be lessened, but the 
writer believes the total expense as given is under, rather 
than over, what might be expected in average practice. 
In the itemized statement no account is taken of the 
labor involved in caring for cows or calves, or fertilizer 
produced by them. 



CHAPTER XXIV. 

THE DUAL PURPOSE COW AND BEEF 
PRODUCTION 

The dual-purpose cow is an established fact. It is 
not claimed that the type has reached permanency or 
that it has acquired a high degree of excellence. Numer- 
ically, from the viewpoint of the breeder of pedigreed 
cattle, her race is relatively insignificant. 

Speaking in general, she exists on many American 
farms as a grade of mixed lineage, but usually showing 
a predominance of Shorthorn blood. 

In addition to those of Shorthorn lineage, should be 
mentioned some very excellent representatives, both 
pedigreed and grades, among the Red Polled and Devon 
breeds. That the dual-purpose type is of late becoming 
more popular is believed by many who are in a position 
to feel the pulse of agricultural sentiment. It is not the 
purpose of the writer to champion the cause of the dual- 
purpose cow. She exists in this country and, judging 
from her long-continued popularity in Great Britain, 
she will continue to figure as a factor in American cattle- 
dom for generations to come. A partial excuse for her 
existence, if one is needed, is that not only she, but her 
offspring, have the capacity for making beef. The dual- 
purpose cow bears, then, at the present time, and is likely 
to for some years to come, a very direct relation to the 
beef producing industry of the United States. Bear 
in mind that the writer is not trying to force the dual- 
purpose type upon an unwilling people. He will not 
long hesitate, however, to advocate the general adoption 
of the dual-purpose type by the beef producers outside 
the range country if thorough investigation proves this 
the most profitable type. Certain it is, that the aban- 

176 



THE DUAL PURPOSE COW 177 

donment of beef cattle breeding and eventually of cattle 
feeding over a large area of the States is a problem that 
this generation must meet unless some practicable solu- 
tion is soon found that will render the business more 
financially attractive. Other conditions surrounding 
the industry may change in such a way as to relieve the 
necessity for change in the type of cattle producing 
our beef supplies. Students of the situation do not 
anticipate permanent relief from outside sources. 

It is because of the repeated statements of exper- 
ienced beef producers and breeders of beef cattle that 
the future supply of beef cattle must be bred from cows 
that are milked, that the writer deems it essential to 
consider briefly the subject of this discussion, leaving 
the reader to adapt the facts presented to local condi- 
tions. 

Some of the pertinent points for consideration are : 

1. Can cows be found that will produce an ample 
milk flow, ample to throw them into the class of profit- 
able dairy cows, and at the same time, when bred to 
bulls of beef breeding produce steers that will make, 
when properly fattened, a satisfactory grade of beef? 

2. What average capacity for production of milk 
and butter fat may be reasonably expected of such cows, 
and the value of such products? 

3. The standard of excellence possible in the steers 
bred from such cows and the value of the calves pro- 
duced on supplemented skim-milk. 

4. Knowing approximately present possibilities of 
production, what is the probable expense including feed 
and labor of accomplishing certain dual results? 

5. Lastly, what are the possibilities of improvement 
in performance and economy of production in dual-pur- 
pose types? It does not fall within the purpose of this 
discussion to dwell on this latter point. It is a matter 
for investigators and breeders to determine. There is, 
of course, some limit to the development of the dual 
capacity. If that limit has been reached in this country, 



178 BEEF PRODUCTION 

it must be admitted that it has been reached quickly 
and without much concerted action upon the part of any 
large number of breeders. 

As to the other points raised, there are some things 
which should be said. Definite data bearing directly 
upon the possibilities of profit in the handling of a dual- 
purpose type of cattle are scarce. 

1. In the introduction, the writer has declared that 
individual animals of the dual-purpose type, the desir- 
able characteristics of which are generally understood, 
exist. 

Performance of grade and registered Shorthorns at 
the Michigan Experiment Station, grade Shorthorns at 
the Wisconsin Station, and again registered Shorthorns 
at the Nebraska Station, to say nothing of numerous 
breeders and farmers throughout the country, should 
be sufficient to prove the possibility of dairy excellence 
in cows of somewhat pronounced beef type. 

The Red Polled breed has also made a good account 
of itself at experiment stations and in the hands of 
farmers and breeders. The Iowa Station^ as well as 
breeders and farmers, have fattened and marketed steers 
from such cows, in some instances the produce of cows 
with which satisfactory dairy records have been made, 
that have sold well up to the top of the market. 
While ''topping the market" is not necessarily an index 
of the highest obtainable quality, it usually accom- 
panies the sale of bullocks very satisfactory to the 
slaughterer. 

2. Dairy performance. 

The Kansas Station has shown that a herd of grade 
cows produced in one year an average of 6288.58 pounds 
milk, containing 251.24 pounds butter fat, per cow. The 
Michigan Station in Bulletin 166 published the dairy 
performance of a herd of twenty-seven grade cows, the 
average production of which was 7009 pounds milk, 
containing 259.91 pounds butter fat. 

The writer is familiar with the type of cows used in 



THE DUAL PURPOSE COW 



179 




180 BEEF PRODUCTION 

this latter demonstration test, and they were, with a few 
possible exceptions, such as would produce a good to 
choice grade of feeding cattle when mated to beef-bred 
bulls of merit. Butter fat is commonly worth at least 
20 cents per pound and skim-milk 15 cents per hundred- 
weight. 

3. The Michigan Station has shown that the calf 
from such cows may be made to weigh 380 pounds at six 
months of age, when fed upon a ration of skim-milk val- 
ued at 20 cents per hundredweight and corn, oats, bran, 
and oil meal at prevailing prices used as supplements 
to the skim-milk and at a cost of $3.42 per hundred- 
weight, not counting labor. 

The items of feed and labor, including milking, in 
caring for the cow and calf, will vary widely in different 
sections. The labor involved would amount approxi- 
mately to $25. The feed for the cow twelve months 
and the calf six, from $45 to $50. 

In the above statements no account is taken of the 
fertilizer produced by the cow and calf and this is by 
no means an inconsiderable item. Nor is any interest 
on the investment charged. It must be admitted that 
in the light of available definite experimental data on 
the subject under discussion, it is impossible to present 
a very satisfactory statement, and it is not claimed that 
the one outlined is more than approximately correct. 
It will be noted that a very large item in the above ex- 
pense account is for labor. This must necessarily be 
true when the cows are milked and the calves fed 
by hand. 

There are those who have settled to their own sat- 
isfaction that the dual-purpose cow must yearly become 
a more important factor in the beef producing industry. 
The writer is investigating the subject. 



CHAPTER XXV. 

SKIM -MILK CALVES 

THE SKIM-MILK CALF NOT POPULAR 

The mere mention of the skim-milk calf in connection 
with beef production is sure to call forth a derisive smile 
from the majority of western and middle western cattle- 
men. To them the skim-milk calf means a stunted, 
paper skinned, pot bellied petite bovine; a fit subject 
for ridicule, but hardly worth bothering with in the feed 
lot. Nor has the western cattleman shot wide of the 
mark. The average skim-milk calf is not "a thing of 
beauty and a joy forever. " Notwithstanding these facts 
he is with us and his number is very likely to increase. 
Not all skim-milk calves are bad. Occasionally a calf 
thus reared makes a good account of himself and de- 
mands the respect of beef purists. It may be assumed 
then that there is a right and a wrong way to rear skim- 
milk calves. 

NOT ALL BAD 

The Nebraska Experiment Station in Bulletin 68 
reports the result of an experiment conducted primarily 
to show the profit of raising skim-milk calves on separa- 
tor milk as compared with that derived from allowing 
them to nurse their dams. It is interesting to note the 
author's observations on these calves which are in sub- 
stance as follows : At six months of age the calves that 
had nursed their dams could be distinguished by their 
better coats and rounder forms from those that had 
been fed on skim-milk, but at the age of one year this 
difference could not be detected, and stockmen un- 
familiar with the individuals could not pick out the 

181 



182 BEEF PRODUCTION 

skim-milk calves. The conclusion from this is that by 
careful feeding, good steers can be raised on skim-milk 
by using ground feed to replace the butter fat. 

HOW TO RAISE A SKIM MILK CALF 

It is obvious that to secure the best results in raising 
a calf by hand we should imitate nature's method as near 
as it is possible. There is a difference of opinion as to 
the best time to take the calf away from the cow; some 
advocate taking the calf away before it nurses at all, 
while others advise allowing the calf to nurse three or 
four times. This latter method is advised by the 
Nebraska, Michigan, and Kansas Experiment stations, 
where experiments with skim-milk calves have received 
considerable attention. It is thought that by this 
method the calf gets a little better start in the world 
and that the nursing is a benefit to the fresh cow. 
The only argument in favor of taking the calf away as 
soon as practicable after birth and before it nurses is 
that if taken away then, the calf can be taught to 
drink more readily than after it has had an opportunity 
to get its nourishment for a time by nursing from the 
udder. It is also thought by some that the cow gives 
up her calf at once with less grief than where she has 
been permitted to enjoy it for a day or so. The writer 
leans to the former method of management; even 
though it means more work for the attendant, it is 
better for the calf. It is possible that a compromise 
method advocated by some is better than either men- 
tioned. This method is to allow the calf to nurse 
once and then remove from the cow. In either in- 
stance the calf must receive the first milk of the dam. 
It is well to let the calf get hungry after first removing 
from the cow, before attempting to feed it from the pail. 
If the calf is strong, a fast of twenty-four hours will 
bring the desired appetite. The calf should be fed 
whole milk for the first three of four weeks and three 
times a day. If a large calf, two quarts in the morning 



SKIM-MILK CALVES 183 

and evening and one at noon should be fed; a small calf 
should have only three pints in the morning and three 
pints in the evening and a quart at noon. It is better to 
feed milk immediately after being drawn from the cow. 
At the end of the third or fourth week, the substitution 
of skim-milk for whole milk may be begun, as also feed- 
ing twice instead of three times a day. This should be 
brought about very gradually. The first time any sub- 
stitution of skim-milk for whole milk is made, let one 
half pint of skim-milk replace an equal amount of whole 
milk. The next time, feed a pint and so on, making a half 
pint additional substitution with each feed. By follow- 
ing this method from ten days to two weeks will be 
required to get the calf safely accustomed to skim-milk. 
A teaspoonful of ground flax mixed in the skim-milk is 
excellent. If any tendency to scours occurs, a small 
amount of blood flour mixed in the milk will check it. 
After the change has been effected, the skim-milk and the 
ground flax may be very gradually increased, until at the 
age of four months the calf should receive a heaping 
tablespoonful of flax meal and five quarts of milk twice 
each clay. Do not forget that ten to twelve quarts of 
skim-milk per day is a full feed for a calf five to six 
months of age. When the calf is three to four weeks old, 
it should have an opportunity to learn to eat oats, bran, 
and corn. Professor Shaw of Michigan recommends the 
following mixture for this purpose : Cornmeal 3 parts, oats 
3 parts, and bran 1 part, by weight. One part oil meal 
should be added to this if no ground flax is fed as sug- 
gested above. The calves may be induced to eat this 
mixture by dropping a tablespoonful of it into the pail 
after the milk is gone. Do not sicken them by feeding 
too liberally. They should also be encouraged to take 
a little silage and nicely cured clover or alfalfa hay. 
As to the amount of concentrates fed, Professor Shaw 
says: "In general, about % pound concentrates per 
100 pounds live weight, varying some, of course, with in- 
dividuals." As a general practice, we strongly advise 



184 BEEF PRODUCTION 

against mixing grain with skim-milk for calf feeding. 
They should be fed separate as advised with the possible 
exception of the small amount of flax meal mentioned. 
One essential point in calf rearing is frequently over- 
looked, namely, the supplying of an ample quantity of 
fresh clean water within the reach of the calves at 
all times. Some use a hog waterer for this purpose. 

The following from Professor Haecker of Minnesota 
is well worth careful reading : 

"It has been the general opinion among farmers that 
separator skim-milk was not a strong or nutritious feed 
and that a large mess must be given to make up in quan- 
tity what they supposed it lacked in quality, and the 
result was that calves were overfed, and indigestion 
would be produced, which was followed by scours and. 
bloat. 

"If directions are strictly followed, the calf will always 
act more hungry after taking its meal than it did 
before, but it is better thus than to give it a larger 
mess and then have a case of scours or bloat on your 
hands. Each calf should be fed by itself out of a clean 
tin pail, which should be washed and scalded after 
each feeding just as thoroughly and carefully as one 
does the milk pails. Place the calves in small 
stanchions while they are being fed, so they will not 
get into the habit of sucking each other. Have the 
little manger in front of them wide enough so an ordi- 
nary tin pail, containing the mess of milk, can be set 
into it. Have partitions placed in the manger, and 
when it has taken the milk, take out the pail, and if 
the calf is old enough to eat oats or bran, throw in 
about a tablespoonful and it will soon get into the habit 
of chewing the oats as soon as it has taken the milk. 
For about that time it wants to do something, and 
if it is not confined in a stanchion or tied out of reach 
of another calf, it will amuse itself by sucking its neigh- 
bor's ears. The bottom of the manger should be a 
dressed board about ten inches wide, and should be so 



SKIM -MILK CALVES - 185 

adjusted that it can be taken out once a week and 
scrubbed with hot water and soap; for the manger 
must be kept absolutely sweet and clean." 

Bulletin 97 of the Kansas Station makes this pertinent 
observation: "Finally, remember that the calf is a 
baby and give it the kindness and care due every baby. 
The better a calf likes you the more it will gain. Pet 
it. Keep its pen and yard dry and comfortable; 
keep it warm in cold weather and give it cool shade in 



PART III. 

ELEMENTARY PRINCIPLES OF STOCK 
FEEDING 1 

GENERAL DISCUSSION 

Familiarity with the science, or the principles govern- 
ing the processes, of stock breeding and stock feeding 
is highly desirable from the standpoint of the stock raiser. 
It is not to be asserted that such knowledge is absolutely 
necessary, for it is well known that we have many suc- 
cessful stock breeders and stock feeders who know little, 
if anything, about the principles of the enterprise to which 
they look with confidence for a competency. Success in 
farming is dependent more upon a thorough familiarity 
with the art or practice than with the science or funda- 
mental principles of the business. The art is the practice 
of stock feeding. Successful stock feeding practice may 
be acquired from personal contact and experience, and 
by carefully observing the methods of our most success- 
ful feeders. Such experience is acquired, at best, but 
slowly, and often at great expense. However, a knowl- 
edge of the scientific principles of stock feeding makes 
it possible for the inexperienced to learn the art more 
quickly, at less expense, and withal more thoroughly. 
Fewer mistakes will be made in stock feeding practice 
by men who are thoroughly familiar with the principles 
of the business than by those ignorant of the same. 
Mistakes in feeding practice are more serious now than 
formerly, and will become more serious with the lapse 
of time, because competition will be keener, land and 
food-stuffs more valuable, and labor more expensive. 

1 Bv the author, in " Practical Farming and Gardening." Rand, 
McNally & Co., Chicago and New York, Publishers. 

186 



PRINCIPLES OF STOCK FEEDING 187 

Professor Brooks of Massachusetts well says: "Some 
knowledge of the composition of animal products and 
of foods; some knowledge of the laws of nutrition, and 
of the facts discovered by scientific men regarding the 
most economical production of meat, of fat, of milk, 
and work, will help even the best practical feeder. Such 
knowledge will not render the exercise of the observing 
faculties and of the judgment the less important. It 
will rather sharpen the one and broaden the other." 

Chemistry of Stock Feeding. — In an attempt to dis- 
cover principles of stock feeding, investigators have 
given much attention to the chemical problems, neg- 
lecting to some extent, perhaps, the physical and the 
physiological factors involved. It is a pardonable over- 
sight, since investigations tending to throw light upon 
the subject should begin with a study of the chemical 
substances necessary for the development of plant and 
animal life. The existence of our farm animals is de- 
pendent upon plant life. There must, therefore, be 
certain elements or compounds in the plant that con- 
tribute to the upbuilding of animal tissues. 

Of the seventy recognized chemical elements which 
in their infinite combinations form all organic and inor- 
ganic substances, only fifteen are involved in plant life, 
viz., calcium, carbon, chlorine, fluorine, hydrogen, iron, 
magnesium, manganese, nitrogen, oxygen, potassium, 
phosphorus, silicon, sodium, and sulphur. 

In making application of the chemistry of plant and 
animal bodies to the subject of stock feeding it is seldom 
necessary to deal directly with these elements, but rather 
with certain compounds made up through various com- 
binations of these elements. These classes of com- 
pounds are practically the same in plant and animal 
bodies and are usually referred to as ash, crude fiber, fat, 
nitrogen-free extract, protein, and water. The per- 
centages of crude fiber and nitrogen-free extract are 
commonly grouped together and referred to as carbohy- 
drates. 



188 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



We reproduce a table from Doctor Jordan's "The 
Feeding of Animals," 1 which will aid the reader to 
understand the relation between the chemical elements 
and the chemical compounds to which we have referred. 







Compounds 


Elements 






' Water ..... 


' Oxygen 
. Hydrogen 

Oxygen 
Sulphur 




Incombus- 




Chlorine 




tible or 




Phosphorus 




Inorganic 




Silicon. Fluorine. 




Matter .... 


Ash < 


Potassium 

Sodium 

Calcium 


411 Veg- 
etable 
or 
Animal 






Magnesium 
Iron 




L 


Manganese 


Matter 






Carbon 
Oxygen 
Hydrogen 






Protein 


Nitrogen 




Combustible 




Sulphur (generally) 




or Organic • 




Phosphorus (sometimes) 




Matter 




. Iron (in a few cases) 






Carbohy- 


Carbon 






drates and - 


Oxygen 






. Fats 


L Hydrogen 



COMPOSITION OF FOOD STUFFS. 

It is necessary, first of all, that the stock raiser recog_ 
nize the fact that the elements with which he fertilizes 
his soil will reappear later on, in a measure large or small, 
in the bodies of the animals he fits for market. These 
elements will have suffered two transformations in the 
meantime, being assimilated, first, by the plant, and 
second, by the animal. All the undigested portion of 
the animal's food will have been returned to the land as 
fertilizer, and all the digested portion as well, except so 
much as has been permanently incorporated in the ani- 

1 New York: The Macmillan Co. 



PRINCIPLES OF STOCK FEEDING 189 

mal body, supposing, of course, that all the manure, 
including the urine, will be returned to the land. In fix- 
ing on the crops to be raised and the feeds to be bought, 
therefore, the intelligent farmer has in mind (1) avail- 
ability for the purpose desired (depending on composi- 
tion and digestibility) and (2) fertilizer value. 

Water and Dry Matter. — All food-stuffs contain a 
considerable proportion of water. The residue is in- 
cluded under the general term "dry matter." A proper 
ration for a farm animal will contain a quantity of dry 
substance which is practically uniform for animals of 
the same species, type, age, and condition. 

Because water is abundant in plant and animal life, 
we should not conclude that it is valueless, but rather, 
as in the case of carbohydrates, that it is essential. The 
leading functions of water related to animal life are as 
a solvent and distributor of other compounds, while it 
gives elasticity and firmness as well to animal tissues. 
Investigations as to the percentage of water in animal 
bodies under normal conditions have shown that usually 
more than 50 per cent of the total weight of an animal 
is water, the percentage varying with the age, condition, 
and species of animal. 

Ash and Organic Matter. — The dry matter of a food 
is subdivided into ash (inorganic, or mineral compon- 
ents) and organic matter. The mineral substance is 
called "ash" because it alone remains when the organic 
matter is driven off by burning. 

It will be observed that the constituent in plants and 
animals containing the greatest number of chemical 
elements is ash, and yet ash seldom constitutes more 
than one-tenth of the animal, and still less of the plant, 
seldom exceeding, in general, one- twentieth. Clover hay 
contains a relatively high percentage of ash, while corn 
yields only a small amount. In the former case there 
are about 6.2 pounds, and in the latter 1.5 pounds ash 
per hundredweight. While the relative amount of ash 
in all food-stuffs is small, it is absolutely necessary to 



190 BEEF PRODUCTION 

promote both animal and vegetable growth. As a mat- 
ter of fact, little attention has been paid to the ash con- 
stituents of plants intended for animal food, largely 
because there has seemingly been a sufficient supply in 
most food-stuffs. Recent investigations reveal the 
fact that the ash constituent in food-stuffs is more 
closely related to commercial production of animal 
products than was formerly supposed. 

Protein, Fat, and Carbohydrates. — The organic com- 
ponents of feeding stuffs fall into three groups: Pro- 
teids, fats, and carbohydrates. 

Protein. — The compounds of vegetable and animal 
structure containing nitrogen are in general terms called 
protein. Compounds of this class vary much in their 
nature, composition, and relative feeding value. They 
have one thing in common, namely, the possession of 
nitrogen. They are, therefore, frequently spoken 
of as nitrogenous compounds. The most expensive 
constituent in fertilizers is nitrogen; likewise the most 
costly food-stuffs are those possessing the highest per- 
centage of digestible protein. Whatever other func- 
tions protein may have, its chief one is that of a flesh 
(lean meat) former. 

Carbohydrates. — The carbohydrates are of two kinds, 
fiber and nitrogen-free extract. The fiber (composed 
principally of cellulose) is the hard, woody framework 
of the plant. The portion available for nutrition ap- 
pears to be digested in the intestines. Nitrogen-free 
extract includes the more easily digested starches, 
sugars, and gums. The carbohydrates are the cheapest 
food-sources of heat, energy, and fat. Since their func- 
tion is the same as that of the digestible fats found in 
feeding-stuffs, and since the fats are about 2% times as 
effective as the carbohydrates, it is customary for the 
sake of simplicity to reckon them together. The fat 
content of a feeding-stuff is multiplied by 2J^ and the 
product is added to the amount of carbohydrates present. 

Carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen — elements which may 



PRINCIPLES OF STOCK FEEDING 191 

be derived from air and water — are the only elements 
found in the carbohydrates; they are frequently spoken 
of as nitrogen-free compounds. 

No other class of chemical compounds comprises so 
large a part of stock foods as the carbohydrates. In 
some cases, as in certain varieties of hay and grain, 
they comprise 80 per cent of the dry matter. While 
abundant in most food-stuffs, they are nevertheless a 
valuable constituent, as being the chief source of energy 
and fat. 

Fat, or Ether-Extract. — The percentages indicated in 
the column headed "Ether Extract" in the table follow- 
ing include several compounds, mainly, however, fats 
that are soluble in ether. The value of the ether-extract 
in a given food-stuff depends largely upon its nature. 

DIGESTION AND GROWTH 

Since only a part is digested, not all the nutrients 
in food-stuffs nourish the animal body. We speak of a 
given food-stuff as containing a certain number of pounds 
of protein per hundredweight. While this knowledge 
may in certain instances be useful to the feeder, the 
important thing to know is, how much available pro- 
tein is present and the character of the feed that con- 
tains it. 

Conditions Affecting Digestion. — In the processes of 
digestion, such portions of the food nutrients as are 
digestible are converted into a form which may be readily 
taken up by the absorbent vessels of the stomach and 
intestines. The undigested portions of food-stuffs are 
believed, in certain instances, to serve the purpose of 
distending the stomach and intestines. In general, a 
much higher percentage of the food nutrients in concen- 
trates is digested than in roughages containing a large 
amount of crude fiber. Other conditions, also, affect 
the relative digestibility of nutrients in food-stuffs: 
(1) Certain species of animals, such as cattle, sheep, and 
other ruminants, digest a higher percentage of crude 



192 BEEF PRODUCTION 

fiber than do others, for example, horses. (2) Not only 
is there a difference in classes of animals as to their di- 
gestive capacities, but there are differences in animals 
of the same class in this regard. In other words, some 
animals are more economical producers of animal pro- 
ducts than others. 

Processes of Digestion and Assimilation. — To be of 
any use, the digested food must be assimilated by the 
animal. The process of assimilation consists in the 
taking up or absorption of digested food particles, which 
are conveyed by the blood to every part of the animal. 
A general knowledge of where the various food nutrients 
are digested is desirable; hence, a brief reference to the 
subject seems pertinent. 

The changes which take place in food during the 
processes of digestion are mainly chemical; but the first 
change or process is a mechanical one — that of masti- 
cation, the process during which the food is broken or 
ground up into fine particles, rendering it more suscep- 
tible to the chemical action of various juices with which 
the food particles come in contact during its passage 
through the alimentary canal. The only food nutrient 
that is partially or wholly digested by the action of the 
digestive ferments with which the masticated food is 
brought in contact in the mouth is a portion of the starch 
constituent of carbohydrates. Whether the amount 
digested is large or small depends upon the thorough- 
ness of mastication and the length of time the food re- 
mains in the mouth. Under ordinary conditions, since 
the food remains there but a short time, the amount of 
starch digested is small. 

The remainder of the digestible starch is digested 
mainly in the intestines. In general, then, we may say 
that carbohydrates are digested partly in the mouth, but 
mainly in the intestines. 

The stomach, by the action of the different ferments 
in the gastric juice, the digestive agent with which the 
food comes in contact in the stomach, digests the greater 



PRINCIPLES OF STOCK FEEDING 



193 



part of the proteids. The remaining digestible proteids 
are digested in the intestines. Fats and oils are mainly 
digested in the intestines. 

COMPOUNDING OF RATIONS 

Agricultural investigators can not hope to attain to 
mathematically exact results. Food constituents vary 
from sample to sample; digestive power varies from 
animal to animal. These variations, however, are not 
great, and hence not serious as disturbing factors. The 
farmer must concern himself with average results to 
meet individual conditions and requirements. 

TABLE I. AVERAGE DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS IN 
AMERICAN FEEDING STUFFS 

The following table of average digestible nutrients 
is reproduced by permission from that valuable work, 
"Feeds and Feeding," by Dean and Director W. A. 
Henry, of the Wisconsin Experiment Station. 



Name of feed 



Dry 

matter 
in TOO 
pounds 



Digestible nutrients 
in 100 pounds 



Protein 



Carbo- 

hy- 
drates 



Ether 
extract 



Fertilizing constituents 
in 1000 pounds. 



Nitro- 
gen 



Phos- 
phoric 
acid 



Potash 



Concentrates 
Corn, all analyses . 

Dent Corn 

Flint corn 

Sweet corn 

Corn cob 

Corn and cob meal 

Corn bran 

Gluten meal 

Germ meal 

Starch refuse 

Grano-gluten 

Hominy chops. . . . 

Glucose meal 

Sugar meal 

Starch feed, wet. . 

Wheat 

High-grade flour. . 
Low-grade flour . . 



Lbs. 

89.1 
89.4 
88.7 
91.2 
89.3 
84.9 
90.9 
91.8 
89.6 
91.8 
94.3 
88.9 
91.9 
93.2 
34.6 

89.5 
87.6 
87.6 



Lbs. 

7.9 

7.8 

8.0 

8.8 

0.4 

4.4 

7.4 

25.8 

9.0 

11.4 

26.7 

7.5 

30.3 

18.7 

5.5 

10.2 

8.9 
8.2 



Lbs. 

66.7 
66.7 
66.2 
63.7 
52.5 
60.0 
59.8 
43.3 
61.2 
58.4 
38.8 
55.2 
35.3 
51.7 
21.7 

69.2 
62.4 
62.7 



Lbs. 
4.3 
4.3 
4.3 
7.0 
0.3 
2.9 
4.6 

11.0 
6.2 
6.5 

12.4 
6.8 

14.5 
8.7 



2.3 

1.7 
0.9 
0.9 



Lbs. 
18.2 
16.5 
16.8 
18.6 

5.0 
14.1 
16.3 
50.3 
26.5 
22.4 
49.8 
16.3 
57.7 
36.3 

9.8 

23.6 

18.9 

28.9 



Lbs. 



.6 

5.7 

12.1 

3.3 

8.0 
7.0 
5.1 

9.8 

'i'.i 

1.0 

7.9 
2.2 
5.6 



Lbs. 
4.0 



6.0 
4.7 
6.8 
0.5 
5.0 
5.2 
1.5 
4.9 

0.3 
1.0 

5.0 
1.5 
3.5 



194 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



Name of feed 



Dry 

matter 
in 100 
pounds 



Digestible nutrients 
in 100 pounds 



Protein 



Carbo- 

hy- 
drates 



Ether 

extract 



Fertilizing constituents 
in 1000 pounds 



Nitro- 
gen 



Phos- 
phoric 
acid 



Potash 



Concentrates 

Dark feeding flour 

Wheat bran 

Wheat bran, 

spring wheat. . . 
Wheat bran, 

winter wheat. . . 
Wheat shorts ... 
Wheat middlings 
Wheat screenings 



Lbs. 



Rye 

Rye bran. . 
Rye shorts. 



Barley 

Malt sprouts 

Brewers' grains, 

wet 

Brewers' grains. 

dried 



Oats 

Oatmeal 

Oat feed or shorts 

Oat dust 

Oat hulls 



Rice 

Rice hulls. . 
Rice bran. . , 
Rice polish.. 



Buckwheat 

Buckwheat hulls.. 
Buckwheat bran. . 
Buckwheat shorts. 
Buckwheat mid^ 
dlings 



Sorghum seed.... 
Broom-corn seed. . 

Kaffir corn 

Millet 



90. 

88. 



88.4 
88.4 
90.7 

89.1 



24.3 

91.8 

89.0 
92.1 
92.3 
93.5 
90.6 

87.6 
91.8 
90.3 
90.0 

87.4 
86.8 
89.5 
88.9 

87.3 

87.2 
85.9 
84.8 
86.0 



Lbs. 

13.5 
12.2 

12.9 

12.3 
12.2 

12.8 
9.8 

9.9 
11.5 
11.9 

8.7 
18.6 

3.9 

15.7 

9.2 

11.5 

12.5 

8.9 

1.3 

4.8 
1.6 
5.3 
9.0 

7.7 

2.1 

7.4 

21.1 

22.0 

7.0 
7.4 
7.8 
8.9 



Lbs. 



61 

39 



40.1 

37.1 
50.0 
53.0 
51.0 

67.6 
50.3 
45.1 

65.6 
37.1 

9.3 

36.3 

47.3 
52.1 
46.9 
38.4 
40.1 

72.2 
44.5 
45.1 
56.4 

49.2 
27.9 
30.4 
33.5 

33.4 

52.1 
48.3 
57.1 
45.0 



Lbs. 

2.0 

2.7 

3.4 

2.6 
3.8 
3.4 
2.2 

1.1 
2.0 
1.6 

1.6 

1.7 

1.4 

5.1 

4.2 
5.9 
2.8 
5.1 
0.6 



1.8 
0.6 
1.9 
5.5 

5.4 

3.1 
2.9 
2.7 
3.2 



Lbs. 

31.8 
26.7 



28.2 
26.3 
24.4 

17.6 
23.2 

18.4 

15.1 
35.5 

8.9 

36.2 

20.6 
23.5 
17.2 
21.6 
5.2 

10.8 

5.8 

7.1 

19.7 

14.4 

4.9 

36.4 



42.8 

14.8 
16.3 

20.4 



Lbs. 

21.4 

28.9 



13.5 

9.5 

11.7 

8.2 
22.8 
12.6 

7.9 
14.3 

3.1 

10.3 

8.2 

9.i 

*2*.4 

1.8 

1.7 

2.9 

26.7 

4.4 
0.7 

17.8 

21.9 

8.1 

'8'.5 



Lbs. 

10.9 
16.1 



5.9 
6.3 

8.4 

5.4 
14.0 

8.1 

4.8 
16.3 

0.5 

0.9 

6.2 

5.3 

5.2 

0.9 
1.4 
2.4 
7.1 

2.1 

5.2 

12.8 

11.4 
4.2 

3.6 



DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS 



195 



Digestible nutrients 
in 100 pounds 



Name of feed 



Dry 

matter 
in 100 
pounds 



Protein 



Carbo- 
hy- 
drates 



Ether 
extract 



Fertilizing constituents 
in 1000 pounds 



Nitro- 
gen 



Phos- 
phoric 
acid 



Potash 



Concentrates 

Flax seed 

Linseed meal, old 

process 

Linseed meal, new 

process 

Cottonseed 

Cottonseed meal. 
Cottonseed hulls. 
Cocoanut meat . . 
Palm-nut meal. .. 

Sunflower seed 

Sunflower seed 

cakes 

Peanut meal 

Rape-seed meal. . . 

Peas 

Soja (soy) bean.. . 

Cow-pea 

Horse bean 

Roughages 

Fodder corn 
Fodder corn, 

green 

Fodder corn, 

field-cured 

Corn stover, field 

cured 

Fresh grass 
Pasture grasses 

(mixed) 

Kentucky blue 

grass 

Timothy, different 

stages 

Orchard grass, in 

bloom 

Red-top, in bloom 

Oat fodder 

Rye fodder 

Sorghum 

Meadow fescue, in 

bloom 



Lbs. 

90.8 

90.8 

89.9 
89.7 
91.8 
88.9 
89.7 
89.6 
92.5 

91.8 

89.3 
90.0 
89.5 
89.2 
85.2 
85.7 



20.7 

57.8 
59.5 

20.0 

34.9 

38.4 

27.0 
34.7 
37.8 
23.4 
20.6 

30.1 



Lbs. 
20.6 

29.3 

28.2 
12.5 
37.2 
0.3 
15.6 
16.0 
12.1 

31.2 

42.9 
25.2 
16.8 
29.6 
18.3 
22.4 



1.0 
2.5 
1.7 

2.5 

3.0 

1.2 

1.5 
2.1 
2.6 
2.1 
0.6 

1.5 



Lbs. 
17.1 

32.7 

40.1 
30.0 
16.9 
33.1 
38.3 
52.6 
20.8 

19.6 
22.8 
23.7 
51.8 
22.3 
54.2 
49.3 



11.6 
34.6 
32.4 

10.2 

19.8 

19.1 

11.4 
21.2 
18.9 
14.1 
12.2 

16.8 



Lbs. 
29.0 

7.0 

2.8 
17.3 
12.2 

1.7 
10.5 

9.0 
29.0 

12.8 
6.9 
7.5 
0.7 

14.4 
1.1 
1.2 



0.4 
1.2 
0.7 

0.5 

0.8 

0.6 

0.5 
0.6 
1.0 
0.4 
0.4 

0.4 



Lbs. 
36.1 

54.3 

57.8 
31.3 
67.9 
6.9 
32.8 
26.9 
22.8 

55.5 
75.6 
49.6 
30.8 
53.0 
33.3 
40.7 



4.1 
17.6 
10.4 

9.1 

4.8 

4.3 

4.9 
3.3 
2.3 



Lbs. 
13.9 

16.6 

18.3 
12.7 
28.8 
2.5 
16.0 
11.0 
12.2 

21.5 
13.1 
20.0 

8.2 
18.7 

12.0 



1.5 
5.4 
2.9 

2.3 

2.6 

1.6 

1.3 
1.5 
0.9 



Lbs. 
10.3 

13.7 

13.9 

11.7 

8.7 

10.2 

24.0 

5.0 

5.6 

11.7 
15.0 
13.0 
9.9 
19.9 

12.9 



3.3 

8.9 
14.0 

7.5 



7.6 

3.8 
7.3 
2.3 



196 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



Name of feed 



Concentrates 

Hungarian grass... 

Green barley 

Peas and oats 

Peas and barley. . 
Hay. 

Timothy 

Orchard grass 

Red-top 

Kentucky blue 
grass 

Hungarian grass 

Mixed grasses 

Rowen (mixed).. . 

Meadow fescue... . 

Soja bean hay .... 

Oat hay 

Marsh or swamp 
hay 

Marsh or swamp 
hay.... 

White daisy 

Straw 

Wheat 

Rye 

Oat 

Barley 

Wheat chaff 

Oat chaff 

Fresh Legumes 

Red clover, dif- 
ferent stages .... 

Alsike, bloom 

Crimson clover. .. . 

Alfalfa 

Cow-pea 

Soja bean. 

Legume hay 

and straw. 

Red clover, med- 
ium 

Red clover, mam- 
moth 



Dry 
matter 

in 100 
pounds 



Lbs. 

28.9 
21.0 
16.0 
16.0 



90.1 
91.1 

78.8 
92.3 

87.1 
83.4 
80.0 
88.7 
91.1 

88.4 

92.1 
85.0 

90.4 

92.9 
90.8 

85.8 
85.7 
85.7 



29.2 
25.2 
19.1 
28.2 
16.4 
24.9 



84.7 
78.8 



Digestible nutrients 
in 100 pounds 



Protein 



Lbs. 

2.0 
1.9 
1.8 
1.7 

2.8 
4.9 

4.8 



2.4 

3.5 

3.8 



2.9 
2.7 
2.4 
3.9 
1.8 
3.2 



6.8 
5.7 



Carbo- 

hy- 
drates 



Lbs. 

16.0 

10.2 

7.1 

7.2 

43.4 
42.3 
46.9 

37.3 
51.7 
40.9 
40.1 
43.3 
38.7 
46.4 

29.9 

44.7 
40.7 

36.3 
40.6 
38.6 
41.2 
23.3 
33.0 



14.8 
13.1 

9.1 
12.7 

8.7 
11.0 



35.8 
32.0 



Ether 
extract 



Lbs. 

0.4 
0.4 
0.2 
0.2 

1.4 
1.4 
1.0 

2.0 

1.3 

1. 

1. 

1. 

1. 

1. 



0.9 

0.7 
1.2 

0.4 
0.4 
0.8 
0.6 
0.5 
0.7 



0.7 
0.6 
0.5 
0.5 

0.2 
0.5 



1.7 
1.9 



Fertilizing constituents 
in 1000 pounds 



Nitro- 
gen 



Lbs. 
3.9 



12.6 
13.1 
11.5 

11.9 
12.0 
14.1 
16.1 
9.9 
23.2 



5.9 
4.6 
6.2 
13.1 
7.9 



20.7 
22.3 



Phos- 
phoric 
acid 



Lbs. 
1.6 



5.3 
4.1 
3.6 

4.0 
35 

2.7 
4.3 
4.0 
6.7 



1.2 

2.8 
2.0 
3.0 
7.0 



1.3 
1.1 
1.3 
1.3 
1.0 
1.5 



3.8 
5.5 



Potash 



Lbs. 
5.5 



9.0 
18.8 
10.2 

15.7 
13.0 
15.5 
14.9 
21.0 
10.8 



5.1 

7.9 

12.4 

20.9 

4.2 



4.6 
2.0 
4.9 
5.6 
3.1 
5.3 



22.0 
12.2 



DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS 



197 



Name of feed 



Dry 

matter 
in 100 
pounds 



Digestible nutrients 
in 100 pounds 



Protein 



Carbo- 

hy- 
drates 



Ether 
extract 



Fertilizing constituents 
in 1000 pounds 



Nitro- 
gen 



Phos- 
phoric 
acid 



Potash 



Concentrates 

Alsike clover .... 

White clover 

Crimson clover . . 

Alfalfa 

Cow-pea 

Soja bean straw . 
Pea-vine straw. . . 

Silage 

Corn 

Clover. 

Sorghum 

Alfalfa 

Grass 

Cow-pea vine 

Soja bean 

Barn-yard millet 

and soja bean . . 
Corn and soja 

bean 



Roots and 
Tubers 

Potato 

Beet, common 
Beet, sugar. . . 
Beet, mangel. . 
Flat turnip. . . 
Ruta-baga. . . . 

Carrot 

Parsnip 

Artichoke 



Miscellaneous 

Cabbage 

Spurry 

Sugar-beet leaves 
Pumpkin, field. . . 
Pumpkin, garden 
Prickly comfrey < 

Rape 

Acorns, fresh. . . . 



Dried blood. 

Meat scrap. . 



Lbs. 

90.3 
90.3 
90.4 
91.6 
89.3 
89.9 
86.4 

20.9 

28.0 
23.9 
27.5 
32.0 
20.7 
25.8 

21.0 

24.0 



21.1 
13.0 
13.5 
9.1 
9.5 
11.4 
11.4 
11.7 
20.0 

15.3 
20.0 
12.0 
9.1 
19.2 
11.6 
14.0 
44.7 

91.5 
89.3 



Lbs. 

8.4 
.5 

5 


8 
3 



11 
10 
11 
10 

2 

4.3 



0.9 
2.0 
0.6 



1.6 



1.6 



0.9 
1.2 
1.1 
1.1 

1 
1 


1 
2 



1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
2.1 

52.3 

66.2 



Lbs. 

42.5 

42.2 
34.9 
39.6 
38.6 
40.0 
32.3 

11.3 
13.5 
14.9 

8.5 
13.4 

8.6 

8.7 

9.2 
13.0 



16.3 
8.8 

10.2 
5.4 
7.2 
8.1 
7.8 

11.2 

16.8 

8.2 
9.8 
4.6 
5.8 
8.3 
4.6 
8.1 
34.4 

.0 
.3 



Lbs. 

1.5 
1.5 
1.2 
1.2 
1.1 
1.0 
0.8 

0.7 
1.0 
0.2 
1.9 
1.6 
0.9 
1.3 

0.7 

0.7 



0.4 
0.3 
0.2 
0.3 
0.8 
0.2 
0.2 
1.7 

2.5 
13.7 



Lbs. 

23.4 
27.5 
20.5 
21.9 
19.5 
17.5 
14.3 

2.8 



3.2 

2.4 
2.2 

1.9 
1.8 
1.9 
1.5 
1.8 
2.6 

3.8 
3.8 
4.1 

1.1 
4.2 
4.5 



135.0 
113.9 



Lbs. 

6.7 
5.2 
4.0 
5.1 
5.2 
4.0 
3.5 

1.1 



1.2 
0.9 
1.0 
0.9 
1.0 
1.2 
0.9 
2.0 
1.4 

1.1 
2.5 
1.5 

1.6 
1.1 
1.5 



13.5 

7.0 



Lbs. 

22.3 

18.1 
13.1 
16.8 
14.7 
13*2 
10.2 



3.7 



4.6 

4.4 
4.8 
3.8 
3.9 
4.9 
5.1 
4.4 
4.7 

4.3 
5.9 
6.2 

6.9 

7.5 
3.6 



7.7 
1.0 



198 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



Name of feed 



Concentrates 

Dried fish 

Beet pulp 

Beet molasses. ... 

Cow's milk 

Cow's milk, colos 

trum 

Skim-milk, grav 

ity 

Skim -milk, centri 

f ugal 

Buttermilk 

Whey 



Dry 

matter 
in 100 
pounds 



Digestible nutrients 
in 100 pounds 



Protein 



Lbs. 

89.2 
10.2 
79.2 

12.8 

25.4 



9.4 
9.9 
6.6 



Lbs. 

44.1 
0.6 
9.1 

3.6 

17.6 

3.1 

2.9 
3.9 

0.8 



Carbo- 



Lbs. 

.0 

7.3 

59.5 

4.9 

2.7 
4.7 

5.2 

4.0 
4.7 



Ether 
extract 



Lbs. 
10.3 

.0 

3.7 

3.6 

0.8 

0.3 
1.1 
0.3 



Fertilizing constituents 
in 1000 pounds 



Nitro- 
gen 



Lbs. 

77.5 

1.4 

14.6 

5.3 

28.2 
5.6 

5.6 

4.8 
1.5 



Phos- 
phoric 
acid 



Lbs. 

120.0 
0.2 
0.5 

1.9 

6.6 

2.0 

2.0 
1.7 
1.4 



Potash 



Lbs. 

2.0 

0.4 

56.3 

1.8 

1.1 

1.9 

1.9 
1.6 
1.8 



FEEDING STANDARDS FOR FARM ANIMALS 
From Henry's "Feeds and Feeding." 

"The standards are arranged to meet the require- 
ments of beef cattle under normal conditions. The 
statements in the standards should not be accepted as 
absolute, but rather as data of a helpful nature, to be 
varied in practice as circumstances suggest. 

"The statements in the column headed 'Dry Matter/ 
should be regarded as approximate only, since the diges- 
tive tract of the animal readily adapts itself to varia- 
tions of ten per cent or more from the standard of 
volume. 

"The column headed, 'Sum of Nutrients,' combines 
the data of the three preceding columns, the ether ex- 
tract being multiplied by 2.4 before adding. In the 
first column of this division of the table, marked 'Crude 
Fiber = 1,' all the digestible nutrients are included. In 
the second division, marked 'Crude Fiber = 3^/ it is 
assumed that 30 per cent of the digestible non-nitrogen- 
ous nutrients consists of crude fiber, and one-half of this, 
or 15 per cent, is deducted. This deduction should be 



FEEDING STANDARDS 



199 



made in the case of rations containing much coarse 
forage. 

"The standards are for animals of normal size. Those 
of small breeds will require somewhat more nutrients, 
amounting in some cases to .3 of a pound of nitrogenous 
and 1.5 pounds of non-nitrogenous digestible nutrients 
daily for 1000 pounds of live weight of animals. 

"The different standards given for the same class of 
animals according to performance illustrate the manner 
and direction in which desirable changes should be made. 

"In considering the fattening standards the student 
should bear in mind that the most rapid fattening is 
usually the most economical, so that the standards 
given may often be profitably increased. 

"The standards for growing animals contemplate 
only a moderate amount of exercise; if much is taken, 
add 15 per cent — mostly non-nitrogenous nutrients — 
to the ration. If no exercise is taken, deduct 15 per 
cent from the standard." 





Per day per 1000 pounds live weight. 




C 

S 
>> 

Si 

Q 


Digestible Nutrients. 




Animal. 


a 
'3 

o 


, » 

t-i t-t 

O >> 


W x 

0) 


Sum of 
nutrients. 


g.2 




Crude Fiber. 


."S (-1 

3 




= 1 


= l A 


fc 


FATTENING 
















CATTLE. 

First period 

Second period . . . 
Third period .... 


Lb. 
30 
30 
26 


Lb. 
2.5 
3.0 
2.7 


Lb. 
15.0 
14.5 
15.0 


Lb. 
0.5 
0.7 
0.7 


Lb. 
18.7 
19.2 
19.4 


Lb 
15.6 
17.0 
17.2 


Lb. 

6.5 

5.4 
6.2 


GROWING CATTLE. 
















BEEF BREEDS. 
















Age in Av.live wt. 
months, per head, 
lbs. 

2-3 150... 

3-6 330... 

6-12 . . . .550.. . 
12-18 . ...750... 
18-24 . . . .950... 
















23 
24 
25 
24 

24 


4.2 
3.5 
2.5 

2.0 

1.8 


13.0 
12.8 
13.2 
12.5 
12.0 


2.0 
1.5 
7 
0.5 
0.4 


20.0 
19.9 
17.4 
15.7 
14.8 


21.5 
19.0 
15.8 
13.9 
13.2 


4.2 
4.7 
6.0 
6.8 

7.2 



200 



BEEF PRODUCTION 



In examining any ration to ascertain how nearly it 
conforms to the standard, and what modifications, if 
any, are needful, attention must be paid to three points : 

(1) Total amount of dry matter. 

(2) Amount of digestible protein. 

(3) Amount of digestible carbohydrates. 

COMPUTING A "BALANCED RATION." 
By the term " balanced ration " is meant a ration in 
which the digestible protein is in the proper proportion 
to the digestible carbohydrates and fats. This relation 
varies with the various classes of animals, and in the 
same class depends on the age of the animal, whether 
the animal is growing, fattening, producing milk, or 
working. By means of tables showing the digestible 
nutrients contained in feed stuffs and the amounts of 
each of the classes of foods required by an animal of 
given weight in a certain condition, it is possible to com- 
pound a ration which is, for that animal, a balanced 
ration. 

To illustrate the method of balancing a ration, sup- 
pose that a steer in the first period of fattening is receiv- 
ing a ration consisting of 15 pounds of corn stover and 
20 pounds of crushed corn daily. By referring to Table 
I. and multiplying the number of pounds of the three 
classes of foods (protein, carbohydrates, and ether ex- 
tract or fat) in a pound of the food-stuffs that are being 
used by the number of pounds that are given the animal, 
we will find that the steer is receiving the following 
amounts of dry matter, proteids, carbohydrates, and 
fats: 





Dry 




Carbo- 


Ether 




matter. 


Protein. 


hydrates. 


extract. 


Corn stover, 15 lb. 


8.92 


0.25 


4.86 


0.105 


Corn (whole or 










crushed)201b.. 


17.82 


1.58 


13.34 


86 


Total 


26.74 


1.83 


18.20 


0.965 


Required by 










Standard .... 


30.00 


2.50 


15.00 


0.50 



BALANCED RATIONS 



201 



The figures in the last line show the amounts that 
German investigators have found to be necessary for a 
1000-lb. steer in the first period of fattening. By 
comparing these figures with those in the line above, 
which represent the amounts that the animal is actually 
getting, it will be seen that he is getting too much car- 
bohydrates and fat and not enough dry matter and 
protein. 

In order to balance up the ration it will be necessary 
to substitute some foods that contain less carbohydrates 
and more protein. By substituting 15 pounds of clover 
hay for the corn stover, and cutting the corn ration 
clown to 13 pounds, the ration will be composed as fol- 
lows: 



Clover hay, 15 lb. 

Corn, 13 lb 

Total 



Dry 

matter. 



12.705 
11.583 

24.288 



Protein. 



1.02 
1.02 
2.04 



Carbo- 
hydrates. 



5.37 

8.67 
14.04 



Ether 
extract. 



0.25 
0.55 

0.80 



It is seen that this ration is lacking in dry matter, 
protein, and carbohydrates, and has too much fat. By 
adding two pounds of linseed oil meal (old process) we 
have the ration as follows : 



Clover hay, 15 lb 

Corn, 13 lb 

Oilmeal, 2 lb 

Total 



Dry 

matter. 



12.705 
11.583 
1.816 
26.10 



Protein. 



1.02 
1.02 

.58 
2.62 



Carbo- 
hydrates. 



5.37 

8.67 

0.65 

14.69 



Ether 
extract. 



0.25 
0.55 
0.14 
0.94 



Although this ration is still somewhat deficient in 
dry matter and has an excessive amount of fat, the pro- 
tein and carbohydrates are present in amounts approx- 
imately as called for by the standard. Little attention 
is paid to the fat in a ration for fattening animals, as 
there is ordinarily more than is required, the essential 
point being to get the protein and carbohydrates in the 



202 BEEF PRODUCTION 

right proportion. While the ration, as in this case, may 
possess sufficient digestible nutrients in proper propor- 
tion it may still need revision on account of a lack of 
palatability, or the proportion of roughage to concen- 
trates may be too large. For the more advanced stages 
of fattening, this ration should be revised, so that less 
roughage and more concentrates are used. 

x The "Nutritive Ratio" of a food-stuff or a ration is 
the relation that exists between the quantity of digestible 
protein and the quantity of digestible carbohydrates and 
fat which it contains. Thus, if 100 pounds of brewer's 
grains contain 15 pounds of digestible protein and 45 
pounds of digestible carbohydrates and fat, the nutri- 
tive ratio is expressed thus: 

Protein is to Carbohydrates and Fat as 15 is to 45, 
or, Protein is to Carbohydrates and Fat as 1 is to 3. 

Or, written mathematically, Protein : Carbohydrates 
+ Fat : : 1 : 3. 

To find the nutritive ratio, then, of a feeding-stuff — 
that is, to find how many pounds or what fraction of a 
pound of digestible carbohydrates and fat it contains 
for each pound of digestible protein — we divide its 
digestible carbohydrates and fat content by its diges- 
tible protein content. The medium ratios lie between 
1 part protein to 53^ parts carbohydrates and fat 
(1 : 5.5) and 1 part protein to 8 parts carbohydrates 
and fat (1 : 8.0). If the carbohydrates largely predom- 
inate, the ratio is said to be wide; if the proportion of 
protein is above the medium, the ratio is said to be nar- 
row. Thus, timothy hay, with a nutritive ratio of 
1 : 16.6, makes a wide ration; vetch hay (1:3.2) a nar- 
row one. 

Narrow Nutritive Ratio. — The following common and 
commercial food-stuffs are relatively high in digestible 
protein and low in digestible carbohydrates: 

Concentrates. — Wheat bran, linseed oil meal, wheat 

1 By the author, in " Practical Farming and Gardening." Rand, 
McNally & Co., Chicago. 



BALANCED RATIONS 203 

middlings, cottonseed meal, gluten meal, pea meal, 
cow-peas, and soy beans. 

Roughage. — Clover, alfalfa, cow-pea, and vetch hay. 

Wide Nutritive Ratio. — The following food-stuffs are 
relatively high in digestible carbohydrates and low in 
digestible protein: 

Concentrates. — Rye, corn, cornmeal, and corn and 
cob meal. 

Roughage. — Timothy, oat, red-top, millet, and Hun- 
garian grass hays, and corn stover. 



INDEX 



Actinomycosis. 133 

Alfalfa hay compared with other roughages ... 68 

Animal and vegetable matter, composition of 188 

Ash in food-stuffs . . . . . . . . 189 

Baby beef, considerations in producing . . . .76 

Baby beef, demand for ...... 76, 122 

Balanced rations ....... 200 

Balanced ration, how to compute ..... 200 

Beef cattle bred on the range . . . . . .158 

Beef cattle bred by farmers . . . . . . 158 

Beef and pork produced from a bushel of corn ... 38 
Beef, breeding for. . . . . . . . 158 

Bsef production, dual purpose cattle for . . .176 

B3ef breeding, cows and heifers for. . . . 159 

Beef breeding, selection of individuals for .... 160 

Beef breeding, selection of a breed for . . . . 160 

Beef breeding cows, selection of . . . . „ .162 

Beef breeding bulls, selection and use of . . . . 162 

Beef breeding bulls, points of excellence in good specimens of 164 
Blackleg; cause, symptoms, and treatment . 135 

Breeding for beef . . . . . . .158 

Breeding herd, care and management of . . . . 166 

Breeding herd, culling of . . . . . . . 167 

Breeding cows, summer feeding of . . . . 168 

Breeding cows, winter feeding of . . . . .169 

Breeding cows, shelter for . . . 169 

Breeding cows, winter feeding of, proper feeds for . .170 

Breeding cows, winter feeding of, corn silage for . . 170 

Breeding cows, winter feeding of, corn stover, straw, and 

clover hay for ........ 170 

Bulls, selection and use of for beef breeding . . . 162 
Bulls, points of excellence in good specimens for beef breed- 
ing 164 

Bulls, management of . . . . . . 165 

Buying feeding cattle; how, when, and where . .17 

Buying feeding cattle, considerations in . . . . 14 

Calves, when to have dropped . . . . .166 

Calves, autumn . . . . . . . . 166 

Calves, spring ......... 166 

Calves, uniformity of age in . . . . . 167 

Calves, when to castrate . . . . . .168 

Calves, cost of rearing on dam . . . . . 172 

Calves, skim milk, how to raise ...... 181 

Carbohydrates in food-stuffs . . . . . . 190 

Carbon in food-stuffs ....... 190 

205 



206 



INDEX 



Care and management of the herd 

Castration, time for ....... 

Cattle feeding, equipment for. .... 

Cattle feeding by farmers, conditions influencing 

Cattle feeding, labor involved in 

Cattle feeding, profits in depend on cost of feeds 

Cattle feeding, relation of to soil fertility 

Chaffing hay and mingling with grain, value of for short 

cattle ....... 

Chaffing hay and mingling with grain, value of . 
Chemistry of stock feeding .... 

Christmas beef, considerations in feeding 
Christmas beef, grade of cattle required to produce 
Christmas beef, market for . . 

Christmas beef, time to market 
Clover hay and corn, gains made on . 
Clover hay compared wtih other roughages 
Clover hay for wintering beef breeding cows 
Commercial feeds, feeding of ... 

Commission and yardage ..... 

Common cattle, demand for .... 

Composition of animal and vegetable matter 
Composition of food-stuffs ..... 

Compounding rations . 

Computing balanced rations . 

Computing the nutritive ratio .... 

Conditions influencing farmers to feed cattle 

Condition powder, a . 

Corn and clover hay, gains made on 

Corn, beef and pork produced per bushel of. 

Corn for fattening cattle .... 

Corn for fattening cattle; whole vs. ground 

Corn for fattening cattle; methods of preparation 

Corn stover for wintering beef breeding cattle 

Corn stover, methods of handling . 

Corn stover, value of for beef production 

Cost price of various grades of feeding cattle in relation 

profits ....... 

Cottonseed meal, feeding of ... . 

Cottonseed meal for summer fattening 
Cottonseed meal, hogs following steers fed . 
Cows and heifers for beef breeding . 
Dehorning stockers and feeders .... 

Digestible nutrients in American feeding stuffs 
Digestion and growth ..... 

Digestion, conditions affecting 

Digestion, processes in .... 

Dry matter in food-stuffs .... 

Dual purpose cow for beef production 

Dual purpose cow, points for consideration in . 

Elements concerned in plant growth . 



fed 



to 



166 

168 

143 

16 

33 

37 

9 

73 

72 

187 

86 

90 

87 

87 

70 

68 

170 

58 

31 

123 

188 

188 

193 

200 

202 

16 

95 

70 

38 

53 

58 

55 

171 

71 

71 

43 

58 

65 

65 

159 

95 

193 

191 

191 

192 

189 

176 

177 

187 



INDEX 



207 



Equipment for cattle feeding 

Ether extract in food-stuffs 

Export cattle, demand for 

Fat in food-stuffs ..... 

Fattening cattle, silage for . 

Fattening cattle, shock corn for 

Fattening cattle, salting of ... 

Fattening cattle on grass .... 

Fattening cattle, when ready for market 

Fattening cattle, sheds, shelter and feed lots for 

Feed-bunks, construction of . 

Feeding period, length of . 

Feeding cattle, buying of ... 

Feeding cattle, advantage in large numbers 

Feeding cattle, how, when and where to buy . 

Feeding cattle, description of various grades of 

Feeding cattle, care of on feed 

Feeding cattle, grooming .... 

Feeding cattle, number of times per day to feed 

Feeding cattle, relation of cost of various grades of to 

in cattle feeding ..... 

Feeding cattle, importance of buying right 
Feeding cattle, relation of initial weights of to profits 

finished beef ..... 

Feeding cattle for the home market 
Feeding stuffs, average digestible nutrients in 
Feeding standards for beef cattle . 
Feeders, fancy select. .... 

Feeders, choice ..... 

Feeders, good ...... 

Feeders, medium .... 

Feeders, common ..... 

Feeders, inferior ..... 

Feed lots, advantages in paving 
Feed lots, how to pave 

Feeds, relation of cost of to profits in cattle feeding 
Feeds, cost of determines number of cattle to be fed 
Fertilizing constituents stored up in grain . 
Fertilizing constituents carried away by selling grain 
Fertilizing constituents saved by stock feeding 
Finishing cattle, aim in ... 

Fitting steers for exhibition 
Food-stuffs, composition of . 
Food-stuffs, water and dry matter in . 
Food-stuffs, ash and organic matter in 
Food-stuffs, protein, fat and carbohydrates in 
Food-stuffs, carbon, hydrogen and oxygen in 
Freight charges ..... 

Full feed, getting cattle on 

Full feed, value of nitrogenous concentrates in getting 

on ........ 



profits 

. 15, 

on the 



!attl< 



143 

191 

123 

191 

57 

58 

94 

107 

124 

143 

143 

100 

14 

15 

17 

21 

92 

93 

93 

43 
43 

40 

102 

193 

199 

21 

22 

26 

27 

28 

29 

145 

147 

37 

37 

10 

10 

11 

51 

115 

188 

189 

189 

190 

190 

30 

49 

51 



208 



INDEX 



Getting cattle on full feed ...... 49 

Grass for fattening cattle . . . . . . 107 

Grass, management of cattle on . . . . 108 

Grass, how to turn cattle on . . . . .109 

Heifers, age to breed . . . . . . . 167 

Hogs following fattening cattle . . . . . .111 

Hogs following fattening cattle, number of to use . . 112 

Hogs following fattening cattle, gains made by 38, 113, 114 

Hogs following cattle fed on cottonseed meal ... 65 

Home market, feeding cattle for . . . . .102 

How to compute balanced rations ..... 200 

"Hydrogen in food-stuffs . . . . . . .190 

Labor a factor in cattle feeding ..... 33 

Labor compensated for by manure produced . . 9, 33 

Labor varies with conditions ..... 34 

Labor, cost of per steer ....... 35 

Labor, methods of economy of .... . 35 

Length of feeding period . . . . . .100 

Lice, eradication of ...... 132 

Linseed cake or meal for fattening cattle ... .58 

Lump-jaw; cause, symptoms and treatment . . . 133 

Manure, value of . . . . . .11 

Manure, compensation for labor in cattle feeding . . 9, 33 

Manure produced by a 1000-lb steer . . . . .10 

Manure composition of a ton of from open barnyard . . 10 

Manure tests at Ohio Station . . . .11 

Manure, sources of fertility of .... . 12 

Manure, balancing of farmyard . . .12 

Manure, value of an important factor in cattle feeding . 13 

Mange; cause and treatment . . . .130 

Medium ratio 202 

Molasses for fattening cattle . . . . . .66 

Narrow ratio ........ 202 

Nitrogenous concentrates; amount to feed .... 64 

Nitrogenous concentrates; at what stage of fattening to feed 65 
Nitrogenous concentrates fed with timothy hay, corn stover 

and straw ........ 61 

Nitrogenous concentrates, value of in getting steers on full feed 51 
Number of feeds per day ....... 93 

Number of feeding cattle to be fed together ... 94 

Nutritive ratio ... .... 202 

Nutritive ratio, how to compute ..... 202 

Oats, place of in ration for fattening cattle .... 66 

Oil meal for fattening cattle ..... 58 

Organic matter in food-stuffs . . . . . .189 

Oxygen in food-stuffs ....... 190 

Pastures in rotation . . . . . . .104 

Pastures, management of . . . . . 106 

Pastures, permanent . . . . . . .104 

Paved feed lots, advantages of . „ . . . 145 

Paved feed lots, how to pave . . . . . .147 



INDEX 



209 



Phosphorus carried away in bones of animals 
Phosphorus, necessity of addition of to farmyard manure 
Plant growth, elements concerned in . 
Pork produced per steer ...... 

Prime cattle, demand for ....... 

Principles of stock feeding, advantage in a knowledge of . 
Profit in cattle feeding, relation of cost of feeds to 
Profits in cattle feeding, relation of initial weight of cattle to 
Profits in cattle feeding, relation of cost of various grades of 

feeding cattle to 
Protein in food-stuffs 
Range bred cattle 
Rations, compounding of 
Rations, balanced 
Ratio, nutritive, how to compute 
Ratio, medium. 
Ratio, narrow 
Ratio, wide 
Ringworm .... 

Roughage for feeding cattle; comparison of different kinds 

Roughage for wintering cattle 

Roughing steers, art of . 

Salting fattening cattle .... 

Self-feeder, advantages of 

Self-feeder, bill of material necessary for 

Self-feeder, how to make 

Self-feeder, opinions of feeders concerning 

Sheds, shelter and feed lots for feeding cattle 

Shipping cattle . . . 

Shrinkage in shipment .... 

Short-fed cattle ..... 

Short feed, possibilities of 

Short feed, selection of cattle for 

Short feed, value of chaffed hay mingled with grain in the 

Silage for fattening cattle ...... 

Silage for wintering beef breeding cattle .... 

Skim milk calves ....... 

Skim milk calves, how to raise ..... 

Soil fertility, relation of cattle feeding to 

Stockers and feeders, wintering ... 

Stock feeding, advantage of a knowledge of the principles of 

Stock feeding, chemistry of . 

Straw for feeding beef cattle 

Summer feeding of breeding cows 

Texas fever, cause of 

Texas fever; remedies and preventive measures 

Water in food-stuffs . 

Wide ratio .... 

Winter feeding of beef breeding cows 
Wintering stockers and feeders 
Yardage .... 



11 

11 

187 

38 

121 

186 

37 

40 

43 

190 

158 

200 

200 

202 

202 

202 

202 

132 

68 

46 

47 

94 

155 

153 

149 

154 

143 

126 

31 

50 

84 

82 

73 

57 

170 

181 

182 

9 

46 

186 

187 

170 

168 

138 

139 

189 

202 

169 

46 

31 



MAY 23 1907 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



002 826 655 8 • 



